SIX  AGES  OF  EUROPEAN  HISTORY 

FROM  A.D.  476  TO  1878 

IN  SIX  VOLUMES 
GENERAL  EDITOR:    A.   H.  JOHNSON,   M.A. 

FELLOW   OF   ALL   SOULS'   COLLEGE,   OXFORD 


VOLUME   VI 

THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

1789-1878 


FOR  THE  HIGHER  FORMS  OF  SCHOOLS 

SIX  AGES  OF  EUROPEAN  HISTORY 

FROM  A.D.  476  TO  1878 

IN  SIX  VOLUMES 

EDITED  BY  A.  H.  JOHNSON,  M.A. 
Fellow  of  All  Souls'  College,  Oxford 

VOL.  I.  THE  DAWN  OF  MEDIEVAL  EUROPE.  476- 
918.  By  the  Rev.  J.  H.  B.  MASTERMAN,  M.A.,  Professor  of 
History  in  the  University  of  Birmingham. 

VOL.  II.  THE  CENTRAL  PERIOD  OF  THE  MIDDLE 
AGE.  918-1273.  By  BEATRICE  A.  LEES,  Resident  History 
Tutor,  Somerville  College,  Oxford. 

VOL.  III.  THE  END  OF  THE  MIDDLE  AGE.  1273-1453. 
By  ELEANOR  C.  LODGE,  Vice-Principal  and  Modern  History 
Tutor,  Lady  Margaret  Hall,  Oxford. 

VOL.  IV.  RENAISSANCE  AND  REFORMATION.  1453- 
1660.  By  MARY  A.  HOLLINGS,  M.A.  Dublin,  Headmistress 
of  Edgbaston  Church  of  England  College  for  Girls. 

VOL.  V.  THE  AGE  OF  THE  ENLIGHTENED  DESPOT. 
1660-1789.  By  A.  H.  JOHNSON,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  All  Souls' 
College,  Oxford. 

VOL.  VI.  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE. 
1789-1878.  By  J.  A.  R.  MARRIOTT,  M.A.,  Lecturer  and 
Tutor  in  Modern  History  and  Economics  at  Worcester 
College,  Oxford. 


THE    REMAKING    OF 
MODERN    EUROPE 

FROM    THE   OUTBREAK   OF   THE 
FRENCH    REVOLUTION  TO  THE  TREATY  OF  BERLIN 

1789-1878 


J.  A.  R.  MARRIOTT,   M.A. 

LECTURER   AND    TUTOR   IN    MODERN    HISTORY   AND    ECONOMICS 

AT    WORCESTER    COLLEGE,    OXFORD 
SECRETARY    TO    THE    UNIVERSITY    EXTENSION    DELEGACY 


WITH    TEN    MAPS 


NEW   YORK:    THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 
LONDON:    METHUEN    &   CO. 

1910 


v. 


TO 

E.  D.  C.  M. 


PKEFACE 

HHHIS  little  book  is  intended  primarily  for 
students  who  are  beginning  the  study  of 
foreign  history  at  Schools  and  Universities.  Such 
students  generally  have  an  examination  in  view, 
but  this  is  not  a  cram  book.  My  hope  is  that 
it  may  be  found  suggestive  and  stimulating,  but 
not  satisfying.  That  it  will  serve  the  less  well, 
on  that  account,  as  a  text-book  for  examinations 
I  do  not  believe,  since  the  best  examiners  do  all 
in  their  power  to  discourage  "cram".  But  it 
will  fail  of  its  main  purpose  if  it  does  not  stimulate 
a  desire  for  bigger  and  better  books  and  ampler 
information. 

Any  one  who  has  been  set  down  to  write  the 
history  of  a  crowded  period  in  a  given  number 
of  words  will  judge  leniently  its  many  imperfec- 
tions. Such  a  task  involves  a  perpetual  choice 
between  obscurity  and  incompleteness.  As 
lucidity  seems  to  me  the  one  essential  quality 
in  an  introductory  sketch  I  have  not  hesitated  to 
prefer  it  to  every  other  consideration.  How  far 
I  have  attained  even  to  this  virtue  my  readers 


vii 


201040 


viii  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

alone  can  judge.  There  are  glaring  omissions, 
especially  in  the  second  part  of  the  book  (1815- 
1878) ;  but  within  the  allotted  limits  of  space  I 
could  do  no  more  than  suggest  the  great  out- 
standing achievements  of  the  period.  It  is  my 
hope  some  day  to  fill  in  the  sketch  here  presented. 

I  have  made  free  use  of  the  works  of  my 
predecessors  in  the  same  field,  but  I  hope  that  I 
have  not,  without  acknowledgment,  appropriated 
their  ideas  or  phrases.  No  one,  however,  wha 
has  been  for  many  years  teaching  a  particular 
subject  can  be  at  all  certain  that  his  most 
cherished  ideas  and  most  original  phrases  ar& 
really  his  own.  On  this  point  many  have  suffered 
cruel  disillusionment.  For  any  unwitting  and 
unacknowledged  appropriation  I  crave  pardon. 

The  maps  have  been  designed  to  subserve  a» 
historical  rather  than  a  geographical  purpose — to- 
emphasise  the  main  lessons  which  it  is  the  purpose 
of  the  text  to  enforce.  I  am  grateful  to  Mr- 
Darbishire  for  the  patience  and  skill  with  which 
he  has  interpreted  my  wishes  in  the  matter.  For 
the  index  I  am  indebted  to  the  assistance  of  my 
wife. 

My  thanks  are  due  to  the  Editor  of  the  series 
for  constant  advice ;  but  that  is  no  uncommon 
or  recent  debt.  Not  a  few  teachers  of  history 
in  Oxford  have  incurred  a  heavy  debt  to  him,, 
and  mine  is  among  the  heaviest.  I  am  grate- 


PREFACE  ix 

ful  also  to  my  friend,  Mr.  C.  R.  L.  Fletcher, 
of  Magdalen  College,  for  reading  the  proofs  of 
the  early  part  (1789-1815),  and  to  the  Eev.  A.B. 
Beaven,  who  performed  a  similar  service  for  the 
later.  Neither  of  these  eminent  scholars  is 
responsible  for  any  errors  which  may  appear,  but 
both  have  saved  me  from  many  which  do  not. 


J.  A.  E.  M. 


WORCESTER  COLLEGE 

OXFORD 
December,  1908 


CONTENTS 

PAGB 

CHAPTER  I. 
INTRODUCTORY ..-1 

CHAPTER  II. 
THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793) 10 

CHAPTER  III. 
THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY — THE  MAKING  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION      21 

CHAPTER  IV. 
EUROPE  AND  THE  REVOLUTION 32 

CHAPTER  V. 
ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE — THE  REIGN  OP  TERROR-  40 

CHAPTER  VI. 
THE    ADVENT    OF   NAPOLEON    BONAPARTE.     THE    REACTION    IN 

FRANCE  (1794-1802) 52 

CHAPTER  VII. 
THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE — ENGLAND  AND  NAPOLEON     -      70 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
TILSIT  AND  THE  CONTINENTAL  SYSTEM 83 

CHAPTER  IX. 
THE  NATIONALIST  REACTION — THE  PENINSULA — GERMANY  -        -      90 

CHAPTER  X. 
THE  Moscow  CAMPAIGN  AND  THE  WAR  OF  LIBERATION  (1812-1814)    103 


xii  THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  CONGRESS  OP  VIENNA  AND  THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815— THE 

HUNDRED  DAYS  AND  WATERLOO 119 

CHAPTER  XII. 
RESTORATION  AND  REACTION — THE  HOLY  ALLIANCE    -        -        -    132 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
THE  GREEK  WAR  OF  INDEPENDENCE  AND  THE  EASTERN  QUESTION    145 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
FRANCE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852)         -        -        -        -    153 

CHAPTER  XV. 
THE  CRIMEAN  WAR  AND  AFTER  (1852-1878)          ....    165 

CHAPTER  XVI. 
REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY  (1815-1849)         ...    173 

CHAPTER  XVII. 
THE  UNIFICATION  OF  ITALY  (1859-1871) 185 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 
GERMANY  (1815-1851) — REACTION,  REVOLUTION  AND  REACTION    -    193 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
THE  PHUSSIANISATION  OF  GERMANY  (1860-1870)    ...        -    207 

CHAPTER  XX. 
THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR         -        -    216 

CHAPTER  XXI. 
AFTERWORD 231 

APPENDIX  I. 243 

APPENDIX  II. 249 

INDEX- .253 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

1789.  Causes  of  the  French  Revolution 14 

Outbreak  of  French  Revolution           -----  10 

Meeting  of  States-general  (May  5)                -        -        -        -  10 

Tiers  6tat  declare  themselves  National  Assembly  (June  17)  12 

Oath  of  the  Tennis  Court  (June  20) 12 

Fall  of  Bastille  (July  14) 12 

Abolition  of  feudalism  (Aug.  4)    -         -        -         -        -        -  21 

Declaration  of  Rights  of  Man  (Aug.) 22 

Mirabeau     --.--..-..23 

"  March  of  the  Maenads "  (Oct.  5  and  6)     -         -         -  24 

1790.  The  new  Constitution          -        -        -        -         -        -         -  25 

Burke' s  Reflections 42 

1791.  Death  of  Mirabeau  (April  2) 27 

Flight  to  Varennes  (June  20) 27 

Republican  F&te  (July  17) 28 

The  Legislative  Assembly  (Oct.  1) 29 

The  Non-jurors 30 

The  Emigre's 31 

Declaration  of  Pilnitz  (Aug.) 33 

1792.  Death  of  Emperor  Leopold  (Mar.  1) 34 

The  Girondist  Ministry 34 

Louis  XVI.  declares  war  on  Austria  (April  20)   -        -        -  34 

French  reverses 34 

Attack  on  the  Tuileries  (June  20) 35 

Prussia  declares  war  on  France  (July  25)  35 

Brunswick's  manifesto --35 

The  Tenth  of  August 35 

Advance  of  the  allies -36 

The  September  massacres 37 

Danton  and  the  National  Defence 37 

Valmy  (Sept.  20) 37 

xiii 


xiv  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 


PAGI 

1792.  French  victories  ----.....37 

The  National  Convention  (Sept.  21) 38 

Abolition  of  the  Monarchy  (Sept.  21)  .        ....  88 

Propagandist  decrees  (Nov.  and  Dec.)         -        -        -        -  40 

1793.  Execution  of  Louis  XVI.  (Jan.  21) 38 

Second  Partition  of  Poland  (Jan.) 54 

France  declares  war  on  England  and  Holland  (Feb.  1)       -  44 

France  declares  war  on  Spain  (Mar.) 44 

Success  of  the  allies  (Feb. -Aug.) 46 

Defeat  of  Dumouriez  at  Neerwinden  (Mar.  18)  -         -        -  46 

Rising  in  La  Vendee 46 

Fall  of  Girondists  (June  2) 46 

Committee  of  Public  Safety  (appointed  Jan.,  reorganised 

July) 46 

Carnot  reorganises  French  army  (Sept.)  46 

Reign  of  Terror  in  France  (June-July,  1794)       ...  47 

French  victories  (Oct.-Dec.) 46,  47 

Execution  of  Queen  Marie  Antoinette  (Oct.  16)  -        -        -  48 

Execution  of  leading  Girondists  (Oct.  31)    -        -        -  48 

1794.  Fall  of  Hebertists  (Mar.  24),  Dantonists  (April  5)        -         49,  50- 

The  Triumvirate 50 

Howe's  naval  victory  (June  1) 53 

Jourdan's  victory  at  Fleurus  (June  26)  54 

Thermidorian  reaction  (July) 50- 

Death  of  Robespierre  (July  28) 51 

French  victories 53 

Belgium  incorporated  in  France 54 

1795.  Conquest  of  Holland  by  France  -  > 54 

The  Batavian  Republic        --...--54 

Third  Partition  of  Poland 54 

Break  up  of  First  Coalition         --.._.  54 

Peace  with  Tuscany  and  Naples 54 

Treaties  of  Basle  (April  and  July) 54 

Suppression  of  risings  in  La  Vendee  and  Brittany     -         -  55 

Directorial  Constitution  (Nov.) 55 

13th  Vendemiaire  (Oct.  4) 56 

Napoleon  Bonaparte 57 

English  occupation  of  Cape  Colony 63 

English  conquests  in  East  and  West  Indies        -        -         -  63 

1796.  Napoleon  Bonaparte's  Italian  campaign  (Lodi,J  May  10 ; 

Arcola,  Nov.  15) 58- 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  xv 

PAGE 

Check  to  French  in  Southern  Germany  59 

English  conquest  of  French  and  Dutch  Colonies  -  -  63 

Hoche's  expedition  to  Bantry  Bay  (Dec.)  -  "  -  -  -  63 

Failure  of  Pitt's  peace  negotiations  (March  and  Dec.)  -  64 

Battle  of  Rivoli  (Jan.  14) 60 

Treaty  of  Tolentino  (Feb.) 59 

Siege  of  Mantua  (June,  1796-Feb.  2),  its  surrender  -  -  60 

English  victory  off  Cape  St.  Vincent  (Feb.  14)  -  -  -  63 
Reorganisation  of  Italy:  Cispadane,  Cisalpine  and 

Ligurian  Republics  (May) 60 

Troubles  in  England 63 

Pitt's  peace  negotiatins  (July) 64 

Coup  d'etat  of  18th  Fructidor  (Sept.  4)  -  -  -  61 

English  victory  at  Camperdown  (Oct.  11)  -  -  -  63 

Treaty  of  Campo-Formio  (Oct.  17) 62 

Cisalpine  Republic 60 

Roman  Republic  (Feb.  15) 64 

Helvetian  Republic  (April  12) 64 

Napoleon's  Egyptian  expedition  (May,  1798-Oct.,  1799)  -  64 

Malta  seized  (June  11) 64 

Capture  of  Alexandria  (July  2) 64 

Battle  of  the  Pyramids  (July  23) 64 

Nelson's  victory  at  the  Nile  (Aug.  1)  ....  64 

The  Second  Coalition  (England,  Russia,  Naples,  Turkey, 

Portugal,  Austria)  (Nov.  and  Dec.)  ...  65 

Parthenopean  Republic  (Jan.)  -  -  .  -  -  66 

Napoleon  in  Syria  (Feb.) 65 

Siege  of  Acre  (Mar.-May)  -  65 

Victories  of  allies 66 

Archduke  Charles  on  Upper  Rhine  and  in  Switzerland 

(Mar.-Sept.) 66 

Kray  and  Suvarroff  in  Italy  (Mar. -Aug.)  ....  66 

Napoleon's  victory  at  Aboukir  (July  24)  -  -  -  65 

His  return  to  France  (Oct.) 65 

Coup  d'ttat  of  18th  Brumaire  (Nov.  9)  ....  65 

Establishment  of  Consulate  (Dec.) 71 

Russia  retires  from  Coalition 68 

Marengo  Campaign 67 

Moreau  in  South  Germany  ......  67 

Napoleon  wins  Marengo  (June  14) 67 

Reconquest  of  Italy 67 


xvi          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

PAGE 

1800.  Moreau  wins  Hohenlinden  (Dec.  3) 67 

Armed  neutrality  v.  England  (Dec.)    -----  68 

1801.  Treaty  of  Luneville  (Feb.  9)         ------  67 

Resignation  of  Pitt  (Mar.) 69 

English  victories  at  Alexandria  (Mar.)        .        ...  68 

Nelson's  victory  at  Copenhagen  (April  2)    -        -        -        -  68 

1802.  Napoleon  President  of  the  Italian  Republic  (Jan.)      -        -  76 

Treaty  of  Amiens  (Mar.  25) 68 

Concordat  confirmed  (April) 74 

Napoleon  First  Consul  for  life  (Aug.) 72 

Piedmont  and  Parma  annexed  to  France  (Sept.  and  Oct.)  -  76 

1803.  French  aggressions  during  Peace 76 

Renewal  of  war  between  England  and  France  (May)  76 

French  occupation  of  Hanover  (June)  77 
English  capture  St.   Lucia  and  Tobago   (June),   Guiana 

(Sept.) 77 

1804.  Issue  of  Code  NapoUon 75 

Murder  of  Due  d'Enghien  (Mar.  21) 73 

Pitt  returns  to  office  (May) 77 

Napoleon  proclaimed  Hereditary  Emperor  (May  18)  -        -  72 
Francis  II.  proclaimed    Hereditary  Emperor  of  Austria 

(Aug.  11) 81 

Napoleon  crowned  by  Pius  VII.  at  Paris  (Dec.  2)  74 

1805.  Napoleon  King  of  Italy  (Mar.)    -        -        -                         -  77 
Third  Coalition  (England,  Russia,  Austria,  Sweden)  -        -  77 

The  Boulogne  Army 78 

Napoleon's  scheme  for  invasion  of  England  78 

Calder  defeats  Villeneuve  off  Cape  Finisterre  (July  22)       -  79 

Napoleon's  march  to  the  Danube 80 

Mack's  capitulation  at  Ulm  (Oct.  20) 80 

Trafalgar  (Oct.  21) 79 

Austerlitz  (Dec.  2) 80 

Treaties  of  Schonbrunn  (Dec.  15),  and  Pressburg  (26)         -  80 

1806.  England  retakes  Cape  Colony 130 

Death  of  Pitt  (Jan.  23) 82 

Prussia  forced  to  accept  Hanover 84 

England  declares  war  on  Prussia  (April)  84 

Kingdom  of  Naples  bestowed  on  Joseph  Bonaparte  (Feb.)  -  81 

Kingdom  of  Holland  bestowed  on  Louis  Bonaparte  (June)  -  81 

Confederation  of  the  Rhine  (July) 81 

H.  R.  E.  dissolved  (Aug.  6) 81 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  xvii 

PAGB 

1806.  Prussia  declares  war  on  France  (Oct.  1)              -        -  85 

Jena  and  Auerstadt  (Oct.  14) 85 

Napoleon  in  Berlin 85 

The  Continental  System  :  1st  Berlin  Decree  (Nov.  21)        -  85 

Napoleon  in  Warsaw --87 

1807.  England  issues  Orders  in  Council  (Jan.-Nov.)  86 

Battle  of  Eylau  (Feb.  8) 87 

French  victory  at  Priedland  (June  14)  87 

Treaties  of  Tilsit  (July  7  and  9) 87 

1807.  Distribution  of  crowns         -------  81 

Bombardment  of  Copenhagen 88 

Reforms  in  Prussia 107 

Junot  in  Portugal,  Treaty  of  Fontainebleau  (Oct.  27)         -  89 

Transportation  of  House  of  Braganza  to  Brazil          -        -  89 

1808.  Napoleon's  interference  in  Spain        .        «...  90 
Joseph  Bonaparte  appointed  King  of  Spain  (June)     -        -  91 

Joachim  Murat  King  of  Naples 91 

Spanish  Juntas 92 

Capitulation  of  Baylen  (July  19) 92 

Sir  Arthur  Wellesley  in  Portugal 92 

Battle  of  Vimiero  (Aug.  21) -        -  92 

Convention  of  Cintra  (Aug.  30) 93 

Napoleon's  victories  in  Spain  (Nov.  and  Dec.)  93 

1809.  Moore's  retreat  and  death   -------93 

Austria  declares  war  on  France  (April  15)  -        -        -  95 

Napoleon's  advance  on  Vienna  (April)         -        ...  95 

Battle  of  Aspern-Essling  (May  21-22) 95 

Risings  in  North  Germany 95 

Wellesley  in  the  Peninsula 93 

Napoleon's  victory  at  Wagram  (July  6)       -        -        -        -  96 

Armistice  of  Znaim  (July  12) 96 

Wellesley's  victory  at  Talavera  (July  27-28)                          -  93 

British  expedition  to  Walcheren  (July  to  Sept.)          -        -  96 

Treaty  of  Vienna  (Oct.  10) 96 

1810.  French  victories  in  the  Peninsula 99 

Napoleon  marries  the  Archduchess  Marie  Louise  (April)    -  98 

Holland  annexed  to  France  (July) 98 

Wellington's  victory  at  Busaco  (Sept.  27)    -        -        -        -  99 

1811.  Massena  retreats  from  Torres  Vedras 99 

Wellington  invades  Spain 99 

Victories  at  Fuentes  d'Onoro,  Almeida  and  Albuera  (May)  99 


xviii         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 


PAGE 


1812.  English  victories  in  Peninsula 100 

Ciudad  Rodrigo  (Jan.),  Badajoz  (April)        ....    IQQ 

Treaty  of  Abo  (April) 106 

Napoleon  declares  war  on  Russia  (April  12)         ...    no 

Treaty  of  Bucharest  (May  28) 146 

Napoleon  crosses  Niemen  (June  24) 110 

Wellington's  victory  at  Salamanca  (July  22)        ...    100 

Wellington  in  Madrid 100 

Battle  of  Borodino  (Sept.  7) 110 

Napoleon  in  Moscow  (Sept.-Oct.) Ill 

Retreat  from  Moscow  (Oct.-Nov.) Ill 

Convention  of  Tauroggen  (Dec.  30) 112 

1813.  Prussia  concludes  Treaty  of  Kalisch  with  Russia  (Feb.  28)     112 
War  of  German  Liberation  ----...    113 

Prussia  declares  war  on  France 113 

Napoleon's  victories  in  Germany  (May)       ....    113 

Armistice  of  Plaswitz  (June  4) 113 

Wellington  wins  Battle  of  Vittoria  (June  21)      -        -        -    100 
Austria  concludes  Treaty  of  Reichenbach  (June  27)     -        -    113 
Austria  declares  war  on  France  (Aug.  12)    -        ...    113 
Battle  of  Dresden  (Aug.  26-27)     ------    114 

Treaty  of  Toplitz  (Sept.  19) 120 

Treaty  of  Ried  (Oct.  8) 12Q 

Battle  of  Leipzic  (Oct.  16-19) 114 

Wellington  in  the  Pyrenees          -        -        -        -        .        .    100 
Allies  enter  France  (Dec.  31) _        .    115 

1814.  Murat  joins  the  allies  (Jan.  5) 120 

Congress  of  Chatillon  (Feb.  and  Mar.)         ....    ne 
Treaty  of  Chaumont  (Mar.  1)       -        -        -        -        -        .    116 

Allies  enter  Paris  (Mar.  31) 116 

Napoleon  abdicates  (April  6) 116 

Louis  XVIII.  enters  Paris  (May  3)  -        -        -    117 

Ferdinand  VII.  enters  Madrid  (May  14)  -        -        -    117 

Pius  VII.  enters  Rome  (May  24) 117 

Victor  Emmanuel  enters  Turin •  -    117 

First  Treaty  of  Paris  signed  (May  30) 117 

Charter  issued  by  Louis  XVIII.  (June  4)    -        -        -        -    117 

Norway  united  to  Sweden  (Aug.) 130 

Congress  of  Vienna  opens  (Nov.  1) 119 

England  and  U.S.A.  conclude  Treaty  of  Ghent  (Dec.  24)  -     130 

1815.  Divisions  at  Vienna  (Jan.) 121 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  xix 

PAGE 

1815.  Napoleon  escapes  from  Elba  (Feb.  26)  and  lands  in  France 

(Mar.  1) 121 

Napoleon  enters  Paris  (Mar.  20) 122 

Reign  of  the  Hundred  Days  (Mar.  20-June  29)    -        -        -  122 

Austrian  campaign  against  Murat  (April  and  May)    -        -  125 

Congress  of  Vienna — Final  Act  (June  10)    ....  126 

Napoleon  crosses  Sambre  (June  15) 123 

Napoleon  defeats  Prussians  at  Ligny  (June  16)  -  123 

Battle  of  Quatre  Bras  (June  16) 123 

Battle  of  Waterloo  (June  18) 124 

Napoleon  abdicates  in  favour  of  his  son  (June  22)       -        -  124 

Allies  enter  Paris  (July  7) 124 

Louis  XVIII.  restored  (July  9) 125 

Napoleon  surrenders  to  H.M.S.  Bellerophon  (July  15)         -  124 

Napoleon  banished  to  St.  Helena  (Aug.  8)   -        -        -        -  125 

The  Holy  Alliance  signed  (Sept.  26) 132 

Ministry  of  Due  de  Richelieu  in  France  (Sept.)  ...  134 

Second  Treaty  of  Paris  signed  (Nov.  20)  125 

Quadruple  Treaty  (Nov.  20) 132 

1816.  Reaction  in  Germany  and  Spain 138 

Accession  of  John  VI.  of  Portugal  and  Brazil  (Mar.)  -        -  139 

1818.  Congress  of  Aix-la-Chapelle 134 

Evacuation  of  French  fortresses  (Nov.  30)  -        -        -        -  134 

Abolition  of  commercial  restrictions  in  Prussia  -  199 

1819.  Karlsbad  Decrees 197 

Beginnings  of  German  Zollverein        -        -                -        -  198 

Ministry  of  Decazes  in  France 135 

1820.  Revolution  in  Spain  (Feb.) 138 

Assassination  of  Due  de  Berri  (Feb.  13)  135 

Richelieu  succeeds  Decazes  as  Prime  Minister  (Feb.  20)     -  135 

Reactionary  measures  in  France 135 

Ferdinand  VII.  compelled  to  accept  Constitution  of  1812 

(Mar.) 138 

Revolution  in  Naples  (July)         -    •    -        -        -        -     140,  174 

Revolution  in  Portugal  (Aug.) 139 

Congress  of  Troppau  (Oct.) ;  transferred  to  Laibach  (Dec.)  140 

1821.  War  of  Greek  Independence  begins 148 

Ferdinand  of  Naples  restored  by  Austria  (Mar.)          -        -  141 

Rising  in  Piedmont  (Mar.) 176 

Victor  Emmanuel  I.  abdicates  in  favour  of  Charles  Felix 

(Mar.)     ,                        176 


xx  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

PAGE 

1821.  Austrian  victory  at  Novara  (April)       -        -        -        - .       -  176 

Richelieu  succeeded  by  Villele  (Dec.) 135 

John  VI.  accepts  new  Constitution  in  Portugal  -        -        -  139 

1822.  Brazil  declares  Independence.     Dom  Pedro  Emperor        -  139 
Canning  succeeds  Castlereagh  as  Foreign  Secretary  (Aug.)  142 
Congress  of  Verona  (Oct.)     - 141 

1823.  French  intervention  in  Spain 142 

Canning  appoints  Consuls  in  Spanish  Colonies  -  143 

Reaction  in  Portugal 143 

Monroe  doctrine  proclaimed  in  U.S.A.        ....  143 

1824.  Death  of  Louis  XVIII.— Charles  X.  succeeds  (Sept.  16)     -  135 

Coup  d'ttat  of  Dom  Miguel 144 

Occupation  of  Crete  by  Ibrahim  Pasha       -        -        -        -  150 

1825.  Independence  of  Spanish  Colonies  recognised  by  Canning  143 
Independence  of  Brazil  recognised  by  Portugal  -        -        -  144 

Devastation  of  the  Morea  by  Ibrahim 150 

Death  of  Alexander  I.  of  Russia— Accession  of  Nicholas 

(Dec.  1) 150 

1826.  Anglo-Russian  Agreement    -        -        -    •    -        -        -        -  150 
Fall  of  Missolonghi  (April) '      -        -  150 

1827.  Ibrahim  takes  Athens  (June) 150 

Treaty  of  London  (July) 150 

Death  of  Canning  (Aug.  8) 151 

Battle  of  Navarino  (Oct.  20) 150 

1828.  Martignac  succeeds  Villele  (Jan.) 135 

Russia  declares  war  on  Turkey 151 

1829.  Russian  victories  in  Turkey 151 

Polignac  Prime  Minister  of  France  (Aug.)  ...        -  135 

Treaty  of  Adrianople  (Sept.) 151 

1830.  French  Revolution  (July) 136 

Accession  of  Louis  Philippe 137 

Insurrection  in  Belgium -  154 

Risings  in  Germany 197 

Risings  in  Italy 177 

1831.  Death  of  Charles  Felix  of  Sardinia — Accession  of  Charles 

Albert  (April  2)  178 

Leopold  of  Saxe-Coburg  chosen  King  of  the  Belgians         -  154 

1832.  Belgian  Independence 154 

Ancona  occupied  by  France 177 

Otto  of  Bavaria  elected  King  of  Greece       ....  151 

1833.  Reaction  in  Germany 198 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  xxi 

PAGE 

1833.    Conquest  of  Syria  by  Mehemet  All      -----  156 

Treaty  of  Unkiar  Skelessi  (July) 156 

League  of  Miinchengratz  (Sept.) 198 

1839.  Renewed  war  between  Turkey  and  Mehemet  All        -        -  156 

1840.  Treaty  of  London 157 

Palmerston  and  the  Eastern  Question         ....  155 

Mehemet  Ali  withdraws  from  Syria    -----  156 

Accession  of  Frederick  William  IV.  of  Prussia  (June  7)     -  200 

1846.  The  Swiss  Sonderbund -  157 

Election  of  Pio  Nono  (June  16) 179 

The  Spanish  marriages  (Oct.  10)                                             •  158 

1847.  United  Diet  in  Berlin  -        -        - 200 

War  of  the  Sonderbund 157 

1848.  Revolution  in  Paris  (Feb.) 160 

Abdication  of  Louis  Philippe       ------  160 

Second  French  Republic 161 

Revolutions  in  Germany,  Hungary  and  Bohemia       -     201,  202 

Republics  established  at  Milan  and  Venice         ...  180 

Constitutions  in  Italy 180 

War  between  Austria  and  Sardinia 181 

Victory  of  Radetsky  at  Custozza  (July  24)  -        -        -        -  181 

Constituent  Assembly  at  Berlin 204 

German  Parliament  at  Frankfort 204 

Austrian  victory  in  Bohemia 203 

Reaction  in  Vienna 204 

Abdication  of  Ferdinand  I.  of  Austria 203 

Accession  of  Francis  Joseph  (Dec.  2) 203 

Louis  Napoleon  elected  President  of   French  Republic 

(Dec.  11)  162 

1849.  Republic  proclaimed  at  Rome  (Feb.) 181 

Austria  defeats  Sardinia  at  Novara  (Mar.  23)      -        -        -  181 

Charles  Albert  abdicates  in  favour  of  Victor  Emanuel        -  181 

Revolt  of  Hungary  (April) 203 

Frederick  William  IV.  refuses  Imperial  Crown  of  Germany 

(April) 205 

Failure  of  federal  movement  in  Germany  -  205 

Suppression  of  Hungarian  rising         -----  203 

French  occupation  of  Rome 181 

Re-establishment  of  Papal  Government      -        ...  182 

End  of  Venetian  Republic  (Aug.) 181 

1851.    Coup  d'ttat  of  Louis  Napoleon  in  France  (Dec.)         -        -  163 


xxii         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

PAGE 

1851.  Restoration  of  German  Bund 206 

1852.  Modification  of  French  Constitution 163 

Cavour  Prime  Minister  of  Sardinia 183 

Napoleon  becomes  Emperor  of  the  French  (Dec.  1)    -        -  163 

1853.  Marriage  of  Napoleon  III.  (Jan.  29)    -        -        -        -        -  164 
Outbreak  of  war  between  Russia  and  Turkey     -        -        -  167 
Massacre  of  Sinope  (Nov.  30) 167 

1854.  Crimean  War 167 

1855.  Intervention  of  Sardinia  in  the  Crimea       -        -        -     167,  183 
Death  of  Czar  Nicholas        -        -        -        -                 -        -  168 

Accession  of  Alexander  II.  (Mar.  2) 168 

Fall  of  Sebastopol  (Sept.) 168 

Surrender  of  Kars  (Nov.) 168 

1856.  The  Peace  of  Paris  (Mar.) 168 

1858.  Prince  William  Regent  of  Prussia 207 

Napoleon  III.  meets  Cavour  at  Plombieres         -        -        -  184 

1859.  War  of  Italian  Liberation 186 

French  alliance  with  Sardinia     ------  186 

Ferdinand  II.  succeeded  by  Francis  II.  in  Two  Sicilies 

(May  22)         -                         187 

Victories  of  Magenta  and  Solferino  (June)  -        ...  186 

Truce  of  Villafranca  (July  11)     -                                -  186 

Union  of  Northern  and  Central  Italy  under  Sardinia          -  186 

1860.  Savoy  and  Nice  annexed  to  France 187 

Garibaldi's  Conquest  of  Sicily  and  Naples  -        ...  187 

Battle  of  Castel  Fidardo  (Sept.  18)               ....  188 

Victor  Emanuel  in  Naples  (Nov.)                 -        -        -        -  188 

1861.  William  I.  becomes  King  of  Prussia  (Jan.)                           -  207 

Kingdom  of  Italy 189 

Italian  Parliament  at  Turin  (Feb.  1) 188 

Death  of  Cavour  (June  6)             189 

1862.  French  Expedition  to  Mexico 219 

Garibaldi  defeated  at  Aspromonte  (Aug.  29)  189 

Bismarck  becomes  Prussian  Minister  (Sept.)      -        -        -  208 

Expulsion  of  King  Otto  from  Greece  (Oct.)         -        -        -  152 

1863.  Death    of    Frederick   VII.    of    Denmark — Accession    of 

Christian  IX.  (Nov.  15) 210 

Reopening  of  Schleswig-Holstein  question  -  210 

Prince  George  of  Denmark  becomes  King  of  Greece  -        -  152 

1864.  Cession  of  Ionian  Isles  to  Greece 152 

Archduke  Maximilian  becomes  Emperor  of  Mexico    -        -  219 


CHEONOLOGICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS       xxiii 

PAGE 

1864.  Schleswig-Holstein  occupied  by  Austria  and  Prussia  -        -  210 

1865.  Convention  of  Gastein — War  between  Prussia  and  Austria 

temporarily  averted  (Aug.) 211 

Meeting  of  Napoleon  III.  and  Bismarck  at  Biarritz   -        -  220 

French  troops  begin  to  withdraw  from  Borne      -        -        -  190 

Italian  capital  transferred  to  Florence        ....  190 

1866.  Bismarck's  Treaty  with  Italy 211 

Seven  Weeks'  War 212 

Battle  of  Langensalza  (June  27) 212 

Prussian  victory  at  Sadowa  (Koniggratz)  (July  3)  212 

Austrian  victories  against  Italy 190 

Treaty  of  Prague  (Aug.  23) 212 

Annexation  of  Hanover,  etc.,  to  Prussia      ....  213 

Cession  of  Venetia  to  Italy 190 

1867.  North  German  Confederation 213 

Defeat  and  execution  of  Emperor  Maximilian  (June)         -  220 

Napoleon's  failure  to  get  Luxemburg  .....  221 

Austrian-Hungarian  Ausgleich  (Feb.)          ....  214 

Garibaldi  defeated  by  French  troops  at  Montana  (Nov.  3)  190 

1868.  Deposition  of  Isabella  of  Spain  (Sept.)        -        -        -        -  222 

1869.  Opening  of  Suez  Canal  (Nov.  17) 237 

Vatican  Council ...,  192 

1870.  Hohenzollern  candidature  in  Spain 222 

Outbreak  of  Franco-German  War 223 

Prussian  victories  at  Worth,  Gravelotte,  etc.  (Aug.)    -        -  224 

Capitulation  of  Napoleon  III.  at  Se"dan  (Sept  2.)         -        -  224 

Overthrow  of  Second  Empire  in  France  (Sept.  4)       -        -  224 

Third  Republic    -                 224 

Siege  of  Paris                                        P        -        -        -        -  225 

Campaign  on  the  Loire 225 

French  troops  withdrawn  from  Kome         ....  191 

Annexation  of  Papal  States  to  Kingdom  of  Italy        -        -  191 

1871.  William  I.  of  Prussia  proclaimed  German  Emperor  (Jan.  18)  229 
Home  becomes  capital  of  Italian  Kingdom         -        -        -  191 

Neutrality  of  Black  Sea  abrogated 170 

Surrender  of  Paris  (Jan.  28) 226 

National  Assembly  at  Bordeaux 226 

Treaty  of  Frankfort  (May  10)      ------  226 

Paris  Commune  (Mar.-May) 226 

Thiers  President  of  French  Republic  (Aug.)        ...  227 

Federal  Empire  established  in  Germany    -        -        -    -  -  229 


xxiv        THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

PAGB 

1873.  Death  of  Napoleon  III.  (Jan.  9) 227 

MacMahon  succeeds  Thiers  as  President  (May  1)  -  -  227 

1875.  Revision  of  French  Constitution 228 

Insurrection  in  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  ....  169 

1875.  Andrassy  Note 170 

1876.  Berlin  Memorandum 170 

Servia  and  Montenegro  declare  war  upon  Turkey       -        -  170 

Bulgarian  atrocities 170 

1877.  Russo-Turkish  War 170 

1878.  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  (Mar.) 171 

Intervention  of  England 171 

Treaty  of  Berlin  (July) -  171 


LIST   OF  MAPS 

PAQE 

EUROPE  (1789-1908) 3 

FRANCO-GERMAN  FRONTIER.    CAMPAIGNS  OF  1793,  1799,  1814, 1815, 

1871- 45 

CENTRAL  EUROPE  IN  1810 97 

THE  CAMPAIGN  OF  TRAFALGAR 101 

MAP  TO  ILLUSTRATE  THE  PENINSULAR  WAR         -        ...  101 

RUSSIA'S  WESTERN  ADVANCE  - 147 

ITALY  (1789-1871)    ....                175 

THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE  (1789-1871) 195 

THE  GROWTH  OF  PRUSSIA  (1786-1867) 209 

THE  BRITISH  EMPIRE  (1789-1908) -  233 


THE 
REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

1789-1878 

CHAPTER  I 

INTRODUCTORY 

THE  period  of  European  History  between  1789  and 
1878  divides  naturally  into  two  unequal  portions. 
The  dividing  line  must  be  drawn  at  the  Battle  of  Water- 
loo and  the  resettlement  of  Europe  at  the  close  of  the 
Great  War  (1815).  The  contrast  between  these  two 
divisions  is  striking,  and  suggests  a  radical  difference  in 
the  method  of  treatment.  From  1789  to  1815  the  gaze 
of  the  spectator  is  concentrated  upon  France.  He  is 
looking  upon  the  successive  scenes  of  a  drama — or  melo- 
drama— with  a  unified  and  coherent  plot.  He  watches  a 
series  of  political  experiments  tried  upon  the  Parisian 
stage :  a  futile  attempt  at  limited  monarchy ;  a  demo- 
cratic republic ;  a  consulate  in  the  hands  of  a  successful 
soldier,  and  finally  an  Empire  based  upon  military  prestige. 
Jle  sees  Europe  growing  more  and  more  uneasy  at  the 
(development  of  events  in  France,  and  at  length  taking  up 
arms  in  order  to  lay  the  horrible  spectre  of  revolution.  He 
/sees  the  assault  unexpectedly  repulsed  by  the  enthusiasm 
of  the  French  republicans,  and  France  in  her  turn  assum- 
ing the  offensive  and  flinging  herself  with  the  ardour  of 
1 


2      THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

a  crusade  upon  the  established  Governments  of  Europe. 
He  sees  power  pass,  as  Burke  predicted  that  it  must,  to 
the  successful  soldier,  who  makes  himself  master  first  of 
the  legions  and  ultimately  of  the  state.  He  sees  Napoleon 
Bonaparte,  not  content  with  the  Empire  of  France,  at- 
tempting, and  with  all  but  complete  success,  to  impose 
his  yoke  upon  the  whole  of  continental  Europe,  and  he 
sees  his  design  frustrated  by  the  tenacity,  the  wealth 
and  the  sea  power  of  Great  Britain.  One  scene  unfolds 
itself  after  another,  and  each  contributes  to  the  syste- 
matic development  of  an  impressive  drama. 

In  the  second  half  of  the  period — from  1815  to  1878 — 
it  is  different.  There  is  indeed  a  principle  of  immense 
significance  underlying  the  mass  of  apparently  miscel- 
laneous and  unrelated  events.  But  at  first  sight  it  is 
difficult  to  discern  it.  The  attention  of  the  bewildered 
spectator  is  drawn  now  to  France,  now  to  Germany,  now 
to  Italy,  now  to  Russia,  now  to  the  Balkan  peninsula  and 
now  to  the  Iberian,  now  to  the  far  East  and  now  to  the 
far  West. 

Nevertheless,  there  is  a  principle  at  work  which 
gives  unity  to  the  historical  manifestations  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  complex 
and  elusive  idea  of  Nationality.  But  the  operation  of 
this  force  is  far  from  uniform.  Sometimes  it  is  disrup- 
tive— tending  to  break  up  a  seeming  unity  into  frag- 
ments, as  in  the  provinces  formerly  subject  to  the  Sultan 
of  Turkey,  and  in  the  countries  -held  together  by  the 
Austrian  Emperor.  More  often  it  has  tended  to  unifi- 
cation; to  weld  into  a  single  whole  artificially  divided 
provinces  or  states,  as  in  Germany  and  Italy. 

I  propose,  therefore,  in  the  first  half  of  the  period  (1789- 
1815)  to  concentrate  attention  upon  France,  and  to  treat 


Empire *_.  I-  ••I' 

House  ofAustria.-MR 
France .E3 

Denmark 123 

Sweden.. lo°ol 

Russia Rx^ 

Turkey |X.~I 

United  Netherlands  V.H 
For  details  of  Italy 

•ee  Map  p.  L75. 
For  details  of 

Germany 
seeMapp.135 


(to  Knifchts  of  S*  John) 


;  o  o  o  o 
>"/  //  o  o  o 


German  Empire  -----  1  •'•'•'  I 

Austro-Hung.MonarchuM 
France  _______       R^ 

Italy  ___________  EKS1 

Denmark 
Sweden 
Norway 
Russia 
Turkey 
ium 


EUROPE 
'308 


Luxemburg 
Monteneqro~~.~' 


4  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

the  history  of  the  other  states  of  Europe  as  subordinate 
to  the  development  of  events  in  France.  In  the  second 
half  (1815-1878)  I  shall  adopt  a  topical  rather  than  a 
strictly  chronological  treatment,  and  shall  group  the  lead- 
ing facts  round  the  great  outstanding  developments  of 
the  century,  such  as  the  unification  of  Germany  and  Italy, 
the  Eastern  Question,  and  the  Constitutional  revolutions 
in  France.  This  method  may  involve  a  certain  amount 
of  repetition,  but  in  no  other  way  is  it  possible  to  impress 
upon  the  student  the  really  characteristic  and  permanently 
significant  achievements  of  this  epoch. 

In  this  connection  the  study  of  political  geography  is 
all-important.  Before  any  attempt  is  made  to  master 
the  details  of  the  period  under  review,  the  student  must 
clearly  grasp  the  main  changes  in  the  map  of  Europe  as 
effected  between  1789  and  1878.  Intermediate  changes 
may  for  the  moment  be  ignored,  but  no  effort  should  be 
spared  to  apprehend  the  nett  results  of  diplomacy  and 
war  upon  the  political  boundaries  of  the  leading  states. 

If  we  compare  the  map  of  Europe l  at  the  beginning  and 
end  of  this  period  the  following  among  other  changes  will 
arrest  attention  :— 

I.  Germany 

The  Holy  Roman  Empire  has  disappeared,  and  a  German 
Empire  has  come  into  being.  Germany,  instead  of  con- 
taining several  hundred  principalities  and  city  states, 
bound  together  by  the  slenderest  of  political  ties,  is  now 
a  Federal  Empire  consisting  of  Prussia  and  twenty-four 
other  sovereign  states,  and  the  Imperial-land  Alsace- 
Lorraine.  From  the  new  Germany  the  various  states 
ruled  by  the  Austrian  Emperor  are  excluded,  and  within 
it  Prussia  has  both  extended  and  consolidated  her  terri- 
1  See  p.  3  supra. 


INTRODUCTORY  5 

tories,  having  absorbed,  in  addition  to  the  great  Rhine 
province,  Schleswig-Holstein,  Lauenburg,  Hanover,  Hesse, 
Nassau,  and  Frankfort-on-Main.1 

II.  Austria- Hungary 

To  the  South  of  Germany  a  new  power  has  arisen  and 
taken  a  place  in  the  European  polity.  No  sooner  was 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire  dissolved  (1806)  than  the  Em- 
peror assumed  the  new  title  of  Emperor  of  Austria.  Under 
this  style  the  house  of  Habsburg-Lorraine  still  successfully 
holds  together  a  compact  but  heterogeneous  collection  of 
states  of  which  the  more  important  are  Austria,  Hungary, 
and  Bohemia.  The  Spanish  Netherlands  have  passed  out 
of  their  keeping  and  have  been  transformed — after  a 
brief  and  unsatisfactory  union  (1815-1830)  with  Holland 
— into  the  new  kingdom  of  Belgium.  Their  Italian  pro- 
vinces have  similarly  gone  to  the  new  kingdom  of  Italy. 

HI.  Poland 

On  the  Eastern  frontier  of  Germany  another  significant 
change  must  be  noted.  That  frontier  is  now  coterminous 
with  that  of  Russia.  The  ancient  kingdom  of  Poland, 
already  dismembered  by  the  first  partition  of  1772,  has 
been  completely  effaced.  Portions  have  fallen  to  the  share 
of  Austria  and  Prussia,  but  the  greater  part  has  been 
swallowed — though  incompletely  digested — by  Russia.2 

IV.  Russia 

The  first  strides  of  Russia — Westward  and  Southward 
— were  taken  in  the  eighteenth  century,  but  her  further 
advance  between  1789  and  1878  is  still  sufficiently  re- 
markable. Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the 
absorption  of  a  great  part  of  Poland  (1793,  1795  and 
1815).  Finland  was  snatched  from  Sweden  in  1809  ;  the 
1  See  maps,  pp.  195  and  209.  2  See  map,  p.  146. 


6     THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

dominion  of  Russia  over  the  Eastern  shore  of  the  Baltic 
was  thus  completed.  On  the  Black  Sea  she  had  already 
obtained  a  strong  grip  by  the  Treaty  of  Kainardji  (1774) ; 
but  her  frontier  to  the  south-west  was  further  advanced 
to  the  Dniester  by  the  Treaty  of  Jassy  (1792)  and  to  the 
Pruth  by  the  Treaty  of  Bucharest  (1812).  Of  even  vaster 
extent  are  her  acquisitions  to  the  east  of  the  Black  Sea  and 
to  the  east  of  the  Caspian,  bringing  her  into  immediate 
contact  with  Persia,  Afghanistan  and  the  Empire  of  China. 
Of  all  the  changes  in  the  political  map  there  are  few  more 
significant  than  those  which  record  the  steady  expansion 
of  the  Russian  Empire. 

V:  The  Balkan  Peninsula 

Hardly  less  conspicuous  than  the  advance  of  Russia  has 
been  the  shrinkage  in  the  dominions  of  the  Turk.  Russia's 
expansion  in  Europe,  and  still  more  in  Asia,  has  been 
largely  at  the  expense  of  Turkey.  But  apart  from  this  the 
Sultan's  authority  has  been  seriously  curtailed.  The  king- 
doms of  Greece,  Roumania  and  Servia  have  been  carved  out 
of  his  European  territory;  the  Principality  of  Bulgaria 
is  independent  in  all  but  name ;  England  is  in  occupation 
and  virtual  possession  of  Egypt  and  Cyprus ;  Austria  has 
practically  incorporated  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina. 
VI,  Italy 

In  1789  Italy  was  in  truth  nothing  more  than  a 
"  geographical  expression,"  divided  up  into  ten  separate 
states.  Central  Italy  still  lay  in  the  grip  of  the  Papacy ; 
Naples  and  Sicily  (the  "Two  Sicilies")  were  ruled  by 
Spanish  Bourbons;  Tuscany  and  most  of  the  smaller 
Duchies  were  in  the  hands  of  Habsburgs ;  Lombardy  was 
incorporated  into  Austria ;  Sardinia  and  Piedmont  were 
governed  by  the  Dukes  of  Savoy,  with  the  title  of  King 
1  See  map,  p.  146. 


INTRODUCTORY  7 

of  Sardinia.  The  republics  of  Venice  and  Genoa  alone 
survived  to  recall  the  Italy  of  the  Middle  Ages,  an  Italy 
which  though  divided  was  independent.  Between  1789 
and  1871  the  changes  in  Italian  government  were 
kaleidoscopic ;  but  from  1848  onwards  they  all  tended 
towards  the  realisation  of  independence  and  unity.  By 
1871  Italy  was  at  last  rid  of  the  foreigner,  and  her  ten 
states  had  become  united,  with  Rome  for  the  capital, 
under  the  House  of  Savoy.  But  the  cradle  of  that 
House  had  passed  with  Nice  to  France.1 

VII.   France  and  the  Iberian  Peninsula 

France  has  undergone  less  rectification  of  frontier  than 
most  of  the  great  European  states.  She  has  gained 
Nice  and  Savoy  from  Italy,  and  lost  Alsace-Lorraine  to 
Germany.  Spain  and  Portugal  show  no  change  as  regards 
the  map  of  Europe. 

VIII.  Scandinavia 

Passing  to  Northern  Europe  we  observe  notable  changes 
in  the  Baltic  lands.  The  cession  of  Finland  by  Sweden 
to  Russia  has  been  already  mentioned.  Sweden  was  com- 
pensated by  the  acquisition  of  Norway,2  snatched  from 
Denmark  in  1815,  and  Denmark  itself  has  suffered  further 
loss  by  the  cession  of  Schleswig-Holstein  to  Prussia  (1866). 

IX.  Holland  and  Belgium 

In  the  Low  Countries  we  have  to  note  the  formation 
of  a  new  kingdom.  The  Southern  Netherlands  were  in 
1789  still  in  the  unwilling  custody  of  Austria.  Absorbed 
for  many  years  into  France  they  were  gladly  ceded  by 
Austria  in  1815  and  combined  with  Holland  to  form  the 
kingdom  of  the  Netherlands.  But  the  union  was  brief 

1  See  map,  p.  175.  2  Declared  independent  in  1905. 


8  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

and  disastrous,  and  in  1830  the  new  kingdom  of  Belgium 
was  brought  into  being  chiefly  through  the  good  offices 
of  England  and  France. 

X.  The  British  Empire 

A  map  of  Europe  avails  but  little  to  indicate  the 
change  which  in  the  course  of  a  century  has  transformed 
the  British  Kingdom  into  a  world-Empire.  In  1789  the 
chance  of  such  a  transformation  seemed  remote ;  the  sun 
of  England  appeared  to  have  set.  Britain  had  lately  lost 
thirteen  colonies  in  North  America,  and  Canada,  though 
under  British  rule,  could  not  yet  be  counted  as  a  British 
Colony.  Advantage  had  recently  been  taken  of  Captain 
Cook's  discoveries  to  despatch  a  ship-load  of  convicts  to 
Botany  Bay  (1786),  but  neither  in  Australia  nor  in  New 
Zealand  had  colonisation  begun.  Cape  Colony  and  Ceylon 
were  still  ruled  by  the  Dutch  East  India  Company. 
Warren  Hastings  had  saved  India  from  the  fate  of  North 
America,  but  the  expansion  of  British  rule  on  the  great 
scale  was  still  to  come  under  Lord  Wellesley,  Lord  Hast- 
ings and  Lord  Dalhousie.  The  story  of  British  expansion 
during  the  century  under  review  must  be  read  mainly  on 
the  maps  of  Asia,  Africa,  Australia  and  North  America. 
But  the  map  of  Europe  shows  notable  additions  to  the 
safeguarding  of  the  great  Mediterranean  highway  by  the 
acquisition  of  Malta  and  Cyprus,  not  to  speak  of  the 
occupation  of  Egypt. 

This  summary  statement  of  the  chief  geographical 
changes  may  suffice  to  indicate  the  nature  of  the  task 
before  a  student  of  this  period.  It  "may  also  suggest  its 
absorbing  interest.  But  more  important  even  than  the 
number  and  extent  of  these  territorial  readjustments  is 


INTRODUCTORY  9 

the  question  of  their  political  significance.  Do  the 
changes  seem  to  obey  any  given  law  ?  Do  they  point 
any  political  moral  ?  Have  they,  in  the  main,  contributed 
to  the  better  government,  to  the  material  prosperity  and 
the  social  well-being  of  the  peoples  immediately  con- 
cerned? It  has  been  reckoned  that  "one-fifth  of  the 
population  of  Europe  may  now  be  called  to  fight  against 
flags  under  which  the  grandfathers  of  men  not  yet  old 
might  have  been  called  on  to  fight,  and  this  without 
reckoning  anything  for  the  separation  of  Austria  from 
Germany  >  or  for  transfers  from  one  German  or  Italian 
flag  to  another".1  This  is  in  itself  a  fact  of  immense 
significance.  But  the  more  important  question  still  re- 
mains to  be  answered.  Have  the  changes  been  due 
merely  to  the  ambition  of  rulers  and  the  whims  of  diplo- 
matists, or  have  they  tended  to  the  fulfilment  of  a  healthy 
political  law  and  to  the  increased  happiness  of  the  masses 
of  the  people  whose  allegiance  has  been  transferred  ? 

It  is  the  main  purpose  of  the  following  pages  to  de- 
scribe the  changes,  thus  summarised,  and  to  attempt  an 
answer  to  the  question  proposed. 

1  Professor  Westlake  :  ap.  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the  Nineteenth 
Century.  (Cambridge  Press.) 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793) 

Les  revolutions  qui  arrivent  dans  les  plus  grands  etats  ne  sont 
point  un  effet  du  hazard,  ni  du  caprice  des  peuples. — SULLY. 

states-  TOURING  the  winter  of  1788-89  France  was  plunged 
LJ  into  unwonted  excitement.  Louis  XVI  (1774- 
1793),  amiable  and  well  intentioned,  but  utterly  lacking 
in  strength  of  character  or  clearness  of  vision,  had  yielded 
to  a  demand  for  the  summoning  of  the  States-general. 
This  general  assembly  of  the  French  Estates — the  Nobles, 
the  Clergy  and  the  Tiers  etat  or  Commons — was  almost 
coeval  in  antiquity  with  the  English  Parliament,  and  in 
structure  was  not  unlike  the  original  form  of  that  body. 
But  in  the  subsequent  development  of  the  two  bodies  there 
was  no  similarity.  The  States-general  was  entirely  de- 
pendent on  the  will  of  the  sovereign,  who  summoned  or 
neglected  to  summon  it  as  he  chose  ;  it  never  acquired  any 
real  control  over  legislation  or  administration,  and  above 
all  never  kept  the  power  of  the  purse.  During  the  last 
three  centuries  it  had  met  at  long  intervals,  and  since  1614 
it  had  never  met  at  all.  It  is  easy,  therefore,  to  imagine 
the  excitement  caused  throughout  France  by  the  an- 
nouncement that  the  States-general  was  to  meet  in  May, 
1789.  There  was  considerable  uncertainty  as  to  proper 
forms  and  methods  of  election,  and  few  people  could  have 
had  any  clear  conception  as  to  what  the  States-general 

10 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793)  11 

when  elected  would  do;  but  the  possibilities  were  as 
imposing  as  they  were  vague,  and  all  men  felt  dimly  that 
a  new  era  was  opening  for  France.  It  is  estimated  that  in 
the  winter  of  1788-89  about  40,000  political  meetings  were 
held,  while  pamphlets  poured  in  their  thousands  from  the 
press,  and  this  in  a  country  which  had  not  witnessed  a 
general  election  for  nearly  two  hundred  years. 

What  were  the  hopes  which  inspired  the  electors? 
What  were  the  grievances  which  they  intended  to  redress  ? 
These  questions  we  are  fortunately  able  to  answer  with 
precision  owing  to  the  survival  of  the  Cahiers — memor- 
anda of  instructions  and  grievances  drawn  up  by  each 
order  for  the  guidance  of  their  representatives.  These 
Cahiers  prove  that  all  classes — privileged  and  unprivi- 
leged alike — looked  for  radical  reform.  All  classes  de- 
manded the  establishment  of  constitutional  government, 
and  looked  to  regular  meetings  of  the  States-general  to 
secure  it.  The  readjustment  of  taxation,  the  abolition  of 
privileges  and  exemptions,  the  removal  of  feudal  burdens 
were  demanded  by  the  Tiers  6tat,  and  were  not  resisted 
— at  any  rate  on  paper — by  Nobles  or  Clergy.  Securities 
were  to  be  obtained  for  personal  liberty,  offices  were  to 
be  open  to  all  classes,  and  all  men  were  to  be  equal  before 
the  law.  The  Cahiers  prove,  in  short,  that  even  before 
the  States-general  met  privilege  was  doomed,  and  that  no 
resistance  would  be  offered  by  any  section  of  the  people 
to  far-reaching  reforms. 

The  States-general  was  opened  by  the  King  on  5th 
May,  1789.  It  consisted  of  1,136  deputies,  of  whom  270 
represented  the  Nobles,  291  the  Clergy  and  575  the  Tiers 
6tat.  By  royal  decree  "  double  representation  "  had  been 
given  to  the  Commons,  and  consequently  their  deputies 
outnumbered  those  of  the  two  other  Orders  combined. 


12  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

But  the  significance  of  the  concession  depended  entirely 
upon  the  decision  of  another  question  hitherto  undecided. 
How  were  the  deputies  to  vote?  By  orders,  in  three 
separate  Houses  ?  Or  as  a  single  assembly — par  tete  ?  If 
in  a  single  House,  the  Nobles  and  Clergy  would  be 
swamped  by  the  double  representation  of  the  Tiers  ttat 
and  all  real  power  would  be  vested  in  the  latter.  For 
six  weeks  this  question  was  hotly  debated  and  no  busi- 
ness was  done,  but  on  17th  June  the  Commons  cut  the 
Gordian  knot  by  declaring  themselves  the  National 
Assembly  of  France,  and  invited  the  other  Orders  to  join 
them.  Three  days  later  (20th  June)  the  Commons,  finding 
themselves  excluded  by  the  King's  orders  from  their 
Hall  of  Assembly,  adjourned  forthwith  to  a  neighbouring 
tennis-court  and  there  registered  a  solemn  oath  not  to 
separate  until  they  had  given  to  France  a  Constitution. 
Had  the  King  at  this  critical  moment  possessed  sufficient 
strength  of  mind  to  ignore  the  advice  of  courtiers  and 
declare  boldly  for  the  Commons,  the  whole  subsequent 
history  of  France  might  have  been  different.  But  the 
King,  while  announcing  a  large  programme  of  reform 
(23rd  June),  refused  to  sanction  the  bold  usurpation  of  the 
Commons  or  to  recognise  the  "  National  Assembly  ".  The 
latter  stuck  to  their  point ;  the  lower  Clergy  (cures) 
joined  them,  and  together  they  defied  the  orders  of  the 
King.  "  Tell  your  master,"  cried  Mirabeau  to  the  grand 
master  of  the  ceremonies,  "  that  we  are  here  by  the  power 
of  the  people,  and  we  shall  not  go  hence  save  at  the 
bayonet's  point."  The  Nobles  and  the  high  Ecclesiastics 
were  persuaded  by  the  King  to  give  way,  and  to  join  the 
Commons.  The  first  great  victory  had  been  won. 
Fall  of  the  ^ne  King,  once  more  listening  to  the  advice  of  his 
Bastille  Queen  and  courtiers,  now  decided  to  mass  troops  on  Paris, 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793)  13 

and  to  dismiss  Necker *  from  his  councils.  Necker,  though 
a  successful  financier,  was  a  timid,  uninspired  and  narrow- 
minded  statesman,  but  his  dismissal  was  rightly  regarded 
as  a  sop  to  the  reactionaries,  and  caused  much  excitement 
in  Paris.  The  concentration  of  troops  caused  more.  Riots 
broke  out ;  national  guards  were  enrolled,  arms  were  dis- 
tributed, and  on  14th  July  the  mob,  having  made  them- 
selves masters  of  the  capital,  attacked,  and  after  five 
hours  of  fighting  captured,  the  Bastille.  This  old  fort- 
ress prison  held  at  the  time  less  than  a  dozen  prisoners, 
but  it  symbolised  all  the  judicial  tyrannies  and  abomina- 
tions of  the  old  regime.  Its  capture  was  hailed,  therefore, 
with  enthusiasm  as  a  blow  struck  for  personal  freedom. 
The  King  on  hearing  the  news  exclaimed :  "  Why,  this 
is  a  revolt !"  "  No,  Sire,"  rejoined  the  Due  de  Liancourt, 
"  it  is  a  revolution  ! " 

It  is  necessary,  at  this  point,  to  pause  and  ask  why  in  Causes  of 
the  summer  of  1789  revolution  thus  blazed  out  in  France  ? 
Revolutions  rarely  come  suddenly,  and  never  by  chance. tlon 
An  accidental  spark  may  fire  the  train,  but  the  train 
itself  must  have  been  long  and  carefully  laid.     The  causes 
of  the  Revolution  in  France  cannot  be  really  understood 
except  by  a  perusal  of  its  history  for  the  last  two  hundred 
years.     But  here  it  must  suffice  to  summarise  them. 

The  first  point  to  realise  is  that  for  centuries  all  political Th 
power  in  France  had  been  concentrated  in  the  hands  of 
the  Crown :  that  all  limiting  and  competing  authorities 
had  been  ruthlessly  swept  aside.  For  this  concentration 
there  were  excellent  historical  reasons.  It  was  the 
monarchy  which  had  made  France.  It  was  the  monarchy 
which  had  resisted  the  efforts  of  a  self-seeking  feudal 
aristocracy  which,  in  its  own  interests,  would  gaily  have 

!See  Vol.jV.  of  this  Series, 


14  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

dismembered  France.  It  was  the  monarchy  which  had 
withstood  the  hardly  less  mischievous  tendencies  of  the 
political  Huguenots.  It  was  the  monarchy  of  Louis  XIV. 
(1643-1715)  which,  entering  upon  a  heritage  bequeathed 
to  it  by  the  patient  labours  of  a  long  series  of  great  kings, 
and  still  greater  ministers,  had  raised  France  to  a  dazz- 
ling pinnacle  of  prestige  among  the  powers  of  Europe. 
But  in  the  eighteenth  century  the  monarchy  had  ceased 
to  be  efficient.  From  India  and  North  America  France 
had  been  expelled  by  the  arms  of  Englishmen :  in  Europe 
its  military  prestige  had  been  shattered  in  a  series  of 
disastrous  and  expensive  wars.  At  home  things  were 
no  better.  The  personal  vices  of  Louis  XV.  (1715-1774) 
were  not  redeemed  by  political  capacity,  and  the  ad- 
ministration drifted  into  confusion  and  bankruptcy. 
But  the  Nemesis  which  waits  on  autocracy  overtook  the 
French  monarchy  not  when  things  were  at  their  worst 
under  the  vicious  and  incompetent  Louis  XV.,  but  when 
reform  was  being  seriously  undertaken  by  the  patriotic 
and  well-meaning  Louis  XVI.  (1774-1793).  Paradoxical 
as  it  may  seem  it  is  generally  so.  The  contrast  between 
increasing  material  prosperity  on  the  one  hand  and 
social  and  fiscal  inequalities  on  the  other,  was,  as  De 
Tocqueville  has  luminously  shown,  one  of  the  main  reasons 
why  revolution  broke  out  in  France.1 

The  Nobles  But  the  Revolution  of  1789  was  directed  not  primarily, 
if  at  all,  against  the  monarchy,  but  against  the  privileged 
orders:  the  Nobility  and  the  Clergy.  And  here  again 
we  are  confronted  by  paradox.  There  was  not  more  of 
feudal  privilege,  in  France  than  in  other  continental 
countries,  but  less.  So  long  as  feudalism  was  intact,  it 
was  immune.  Richelieu,  early  in  the  seventeenth  century, 

i  See  De  Tocqueville.     France  before  1789,  bk  ii.,  c.  i. 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793)  15 

had  destroyed  the  political  powers  of  the  French  nobility  : 
but  the  loss  of  their  political  functions  served  to  render 
only  more  hateful  the  survival  of  social  and  fiscal 
privileges.  "  Against  whom  are  the  Germans  fighting  ? " 
Von  Ranke  was  asked  in  1870.  "  Against  Louis  XIV." 
was  his  prompt  reply.  If  Louis  XIV.  was  responsible 
for  the  Franco-German  war,  Richelieu  was  largely  re- 
sponsible for  the  Revolution  of  1789.1  Feudalism  as  a 
political  institution  had  long  since  disappeared  in  France ; 
as  a  social  institution  the  fabric  was  intact.  The  Nobles 
still  enjoyed  virtual  immunity  from  direct  taxation,  and 
escaped  too  lightly  from  indirect ;  they  could  still  com- 
pel the  peasants  to  grind  their  corn  at  the  lord's  mill,  to 
press  their  grapes  in  his  wine-press,  to  pay  innumerable 
dues  and  tolls,  and  to  submit  to  social  customs  some  of 
which  were  degrading  and  all  of  which  were  obsolete. 
Such  privileges  were  tolerable  so  long  as  the  Nobles 
governed  and  defended  the  country,  and  they  were  less 
felt  so  long  as  the  peasants  were  tenants  and  serfs.  But 
before  the  Revolution  the  Nobles  had  ceased  not  only  to 
be  governors  but  in  great  measure  to  be  landlords.  Serf- 
dom had  practically  disappeared;  the  peasant  had  be- 
come the  owner  of  the  soil  he  tilled ;  the  noble  had  become 
a  mere  non-resident  rent-charger,  and  the  mutual  relations 
of  the  two  classes  had  in  consequence  become  intolerable. 

The  great  Ecclesiastics  were  even  more  unpopular  than  The  Church 
the  Nobles.  Drawn  largely  from  the  same  social  class 
they  enjoyed  the  same  social  privileges,  and  their  clerical 
privileges  in  addition.  And  just  as  Richelieu  had  under- 
mined the  position  of  the  nobles,  so  Voltaire  and  the 
other  great  writers  of  the  eighteenth  century  had  under- 

JDe  Tocqueville's  luminous  work  UAncien  Regime  is  largely  a 
commentary  on  this  text. 


16  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

mined  the  prestige  of  the  Church.  The  cures  or  parish 
priests  for  the  most  part  retained  the  affection  of  their 
flocks  by  their  devotion  to  duty,  and  by  the  fact  that 
they  shared  the  poverty  and  hardships  of  the  peasant 
class  from  which  they  were  drawn.  And  with  the  Tiers 
Mat  they  joined  hands  when  the  day  of  revolution  came. 
Not  against  them,  but  against  the  vast  wealth  and  luxuri- 
ous lives  of  the  princes  of  the  Church  was  the  satire  of 
Voltaire  and  the  fury  of  the  revolutionary  mob  directed. 
Added  to  the  political  and  social  causes  making  for 
revolution  in  France  there  were  economic  and  fiscal  reasons 
tending  to  the  same  end. 

The  fiscal  It  is  difficult  for  an  Englishman,  accustomed  for  many 
generations  to  see  the  rich  bearing  the  main  burden  of 
taxation,  to  realise  the  extent  to  which  in  France  this 
burden  was  borne  by  the  poor.  Ifo  has  been  estimated 
that  in  the  eighteenth  century  a  French  peasant  could 
count  on  less  than  one-fifth  of  his  income  for  his  personal 
enjoyment  and  support.  Eighty-two  per  cent,  went  in 
taxes,  tithe  and  feudal  dues.  From  direct  taxes,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  Nobles  and  Clergy  were  all  but  exempt,  as  were 
the  official  classes.  Places  were,  indeed,  eagerly  sought 
largely  in  order  to  secure  this  privilege.  Of  indirect  taxa- 
tion the  same  classes  bore  less  than  their  share.  The  real 
burden  fell  upon  the  poor.  Small  wonder  that  France  was 
in  chronic  bankruptcy,  and  that  every  capable  financier 
who  came  into  power  demanded — Turgot  most  loudly 
of  all — that  there  should  be  an  end  of  these  mischievous 
exemptions.  Unfortunately,  the  role  of  constitutional 
opposition  was  assumed,  in  the  prse-revolutionary  era,  by 
the  great  judicial  corporations  or  Parlements.  These 
"  nobles  of  the  robe  "  were  themselves  highly  privileged, 
and  the  last  principle  which  they  were  prepared  to  accept 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793)  17 

was  that  of  equality  of  taxation.  Bather  than  surrender 
one  iota  of  privilege  in  this  respect  they  preferred  to 
compel  the  Crown  to  summon  "a  meeting  of  the  States- 
general.  Never  did  a  privileged  order  show  itself  more 
selfishly  short-sighted. 

But  bad  as  was  the  taxative  system  of  the  old  regime,  Com- 
the  commercial  system  was  worse.  An  unjust  and  inef-  system 
fective  system  of  taxation  prevents  the  government  from 
utilising  for  national  purposes  the  wealth  of  its  citizens. 
But  a  bad  commercial  system  prevents  the  creation  of 
wealth.  French  trade  in  the  eighteenth  century  was 
still  wrapped  in  the  swaddling  clothes  appropriate  to 
infancy.  Production  was  hampered  by  the  survival  of 
"guilds"  and  corporations,  and  exchange  was  rendered 
as  cumbrous  and  difficult  as  possible  by  a  multitude  of 
internal  custom  barriers,  and  by  stacks  of  antiquated 
regulations.  English  travellers  well  qualified  to  judge 
— like  Adam  Smith  and  Arthur  Young — point  to  France 
as  a  veritable  "museum  of  economic  errors".  Turgot 
(Controller-general,  1774-76)  did  all  in  his  power  to  re- 
form these  abuses.  He  did  much  to  equalise  the  burdens 
of  taxation ;  he  restored  national  credit ;  he  reformed 
fiscal  abuses;  he  broke  down  barriers  on  internal  com- 
merce;  he  suppressed  guilds  and  emancipated  industry; 
he  abolished  the  corvee  and  reformed  the  octroi.  But  what 
he  was  allowed  to  accomplish  was  not  a  tithe  of  what  he 
proposed,  and  his  project  of  establishing  a  uniform  tax 
on  land  from  which  none  should  be  exempt  was  in- 
dignantly rejected  by  the  privileged  classes.  His  pro- 
jected reforms  meant  the  curtailment  of  privilege;  the 
privileged  classes  were  too  strong  for  this  intrepid  and 
enlightened  reformer,  and  he  was  dismissed.  His  suc- 
cessor Necker  did  something,  but  not  enough,  and  the 
2 


18  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

trade  of  France  was  still  struggling  to  emancipate  itself 
from  mediaeval  shackles  when  the  Revolution  broke  out. 
Economic  reform,  therefore,  not  less  than  social  and 
political,  was  imperatively  required. 

The  There  remains  to  be  noted  a  curious  feature  of  the 

sophers  situation.  In  France  there  existed  side  by  side  gross 
practical  abuses  and  exceptionally  enlightened  theories. 
Nowhere  was  public  opinion  better  informed  or  more 
critical.  But  the  mischief  was  that  the  critics  had  no 
chance  of  giving  effect  to  their  theories  in  practical 
administration.  Adam  Smith  learnt  his  Free  Trade 
principles  in  France,  partly  from  the  French  Physiocrats, 
partly  from  an  examination,  at  close  quarters,  of  the 
reductio  ad  absurdum  of  Protection.  He  taught  Pitt 
the  principles  which  the  latter  carried  into  practical 
effect  at  the  Exchequer.  Turgot  was  just  as  apt  a  pupil 
of  Quesnay  as  was  Pitt  of  Adam  Smith.  But  while 
Pitt  was  the  master  of  the  House  of  Commons,  Turgot 
was  the  servant  of  the  King.  None  the  less  the  work  of 
the  French  theorists,  of  Quesnay  and  the  Economists,  of 
Diderot  and  the  Encyclopaedists,  of  Voltaire  and  Mon- 
tesquieu, and  above  all  Rousseau,  must  be  reckoned  as 
among  the  most  potent  of  the  forces  which  prepared  the 
way  for  the  Revolution.  Napoleon  declared  that  if 
Rousseau  had  never  lived  there  would  have  been  no 
Revolution,  and  it  is  true  that  without  Rousseau  the 
Revolution  would  have  followed  a  very  different  course. 
His  Contrat  Social,  published  in  1762,  exercised,  and 
continues  to  exercise,  a  profound  influence  upon  political 
thought.  It  is  the  gospel  of  modern  Democracy.  All 
government,  according  to  its  maxims,  rests  upon  the  con- 
sent of  the  governed.  How,  he  asked,  can  the  individual 
citizen,  while  securing  the  advantages  of  political  society, 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION  (1789-1793)  19 

"  obey  only  himself  and  remain  as  free  as  before  "  ?  He 
can  do  so  only  by  entering  into  the  fundamental  con- 
tract from  which  emerges  the  sovereignty  of  the 
people.  That  sovereignty  is,  accordingly,  illimitable, 
irresponsible,  inalienable  and  indivisible.  Voltaire  de- 
scribed Rousseau's  doctrines  as  a  "code  of  anarchy,"  but 
the  influence  of  his  teaching  was  immediate  and  pro- 
found. Into  a  soil  prepared  by  social  grievances,  by 
political  abuses,  and  by  mischievous  economic  restraints, 
Rousseau  flung  broadcast  the  seed  of  philosophical 
speculation.  To  masses  of  men  who  were  at  once 
credulous,  oppressed,  and  inexperienced  he  preached  a 
new  social  gospel. 

Thus  was  the  train  of  revolution  laid.  Three  sparks 
ignited  the  powder. 

The  first  was  the  revolt  of  the  English  Colonies  in 
North  America  (1765-1783).  In  that  revolution  France 
saw  a  welcome  opportunity  of  paying  off  old  scores 
against  England,  and  of  putting  her  own  philosophical 
theories  into  practice  at  a  neighbour's  expense.  No  doubt 
France  fired  a  big  gun  against  England,  but  the  recoil 
was  terrific.  The  American  war  was  the  last  financial 
straw,  and  France  sank  into  bankruptcy  from  which 
she  did  not  emerge  until  the  Revolution.  Moreover,  the 
success  of  the  rebels  encouraged  revolutionary  doctrines 
at  home.  The  autocracy  was  seriously  alarmed,  and 
pushed  on  the  work  of  reform  with  feverish  haste.  The 
last  years  of  the  old  regime  were  crowded  with  reforms 
projected  and  effected.  But  again  and  again  reform 
found  itself  broken  on  the  wheel  of  privilege,  and  slowly 
people  began  to  realise  that  before  reform  could  be 
effectual  privilege  must  be  dislodged,  and  that  privilege 
would  not  be  dislodged  by  any  existing  political 


20  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

machinery.  New  and  stronger  weapons  would  have 
to  be  forged. 

The  second  spark  was  applied  by  the  Parliament  of 
Paris,  which,  though  the  home  and  incarnation  of  Privilege, 
startled  the  world  at  this  moment  by  demanding  that  the 
States-general  should  be  convoked.  The  States-general, 
when  it  met,  got  rid  of  much  besides  the  Parliament  of 
Paris. 

Finally:  during  the  winter  of  1788-89  France  was  de- 
vastated by  famine  and  its  trade  was  dislocated  by  an 
economic  crisis  of  unprecedented  severity.  It  must  never 
be  forgotten  that  the  elections  to  the  first  States-general 
elected  since  1614  took  place  at  a  moment  when  thousands 
of  Frenchmen  were  starving,  and  that  when  it  met  Paris 
was  thronged  by  workless  and  destitute  crowds.  But 
for  this  fact  the  French  Revolution  might  never  have 
assumed  its  lawless  and  bloodthirsty  character. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY 

THE  MAKING  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION 

Making  the  Constitution  which  is  a  new  term  they  have 
adopted,  as  if  a  Constitution  was  a  pudding  to  be  made  from  a  re- 
ceipt.— ABTHUB  YOUNG. 

THE  capture  of  the  Bastille  marked  the  beginning  of  The  "St. 
mob  rule  in  Paris.     The  example  of  Paris   was^h0°fle" 
soon  followed  by  the  Provinces.     Inflammatory  speeches  Pr°perty' 
were  addressed  from  thousands  of  platforms  to  starving 
peasants  and  workless  artisans.     In  the  garrison  towns 
fortresses   were   stormed  by   the   mob   and   the   troops 
fraternised  with  the  people ;  in  the  country,  monasteries 
were  sacked  and  chateaux  were  burnt.     Everywhere  the 
Government   showed   itself  impotent  to  maintain  order 
or  to  protect  life  or  property.     In  a  few  weeks  the  old 
regime,  and  all  for  which  it  stood,  had  collapsed  from  end 
to  end  of  France. 

The  National  Assembly  at  Versailles,  worked  up  to 
a  pitch  of  hysterical  excitement  by  the  reports  which 
daily  arrived  from  the  Provinces,  proceeded  to  a  "St. 
Bartholemew  of  Property".  On  4th  August  ("the  ex- 
treme unction  day  of  Feudalism "  in  Carlyle's  phrase) 
the  Assembly  adopted  a  frenzied  series  of  resolutions 
designed  to  get  rid  of  the  last  relics  of  the  feudal  system. 

21 


22  THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

All  men  were  to  be  henceforth  equal  before  the  law; 
offices  and  preferments  were  to  be  open  to  all;  justice 
was  to  be  administered  gratuitously ;  serfdom,  forced 
labour  (the  corvee),  all  customary  services,  all  exclusive 
sporting  rights  were  to  cease ;  guilds  and  corporations 
were  to  be  dissolved,  and  labour  was  henceforth  to  be 
"free";  tithes,  annates  and  pluralities  were  abolished. 
One  night's  work  thus  sufficed  to  complete  the  destruc- 
tion of  a  social  system  under  which  Frenchmen  had  lived 
for  centuries. 

The  Rights  Meanwhile  there  was  imperative  need  for  the  Assembly 
of  Man  j.o  embark  on  the  Work  of  reconstruction.  The  old 
Government  had  collapsed ;  nothing  had  been  devised  to 
replace  it,  and  France  was  drifting  into  anarchy.  But 
precious  weeks  were  consumed  in  the  composition  of  a 
Declaration  of  the  "  natural,  inalienable  and  sacred  rights 
of  man  in  order  that  this  Declaration,  being  constantly 
before  all  members  of  the  social  body  shall  remind  them 
continually  of  their  rights  and  duties".  Among  these 
rights  were  "  liberty,  property,  security  and  resistance1  to 
oppression "  ;  freedom  from  unlawful  arrest ;  freedom  of 
conscience ;  and  security  of  property.  This  famous  docu- 
ment was  published  on  27th  August,  1789. 

Making  the  This  done  the  Assembly  proceeded  to  "make"  anew 
Constitu-  Constitution,  "  as  if,"  says  Arthur  Young, "  a  Constitution 
was  a  pudding  to  be  made  from  a  receipt".  Two  points 
were  decided  in  September  :  (1)  that  the  legislature  should 
consist  of  a  single  elected  chamber,  and  (2)  that  upon 
the  legislative  proposals  of  this  single  chamber  the  King 
should  have  merely  a  suspensive  veto.  Against  the 
narrow  pedantry  of  these  decisions  one  strong  voice  was 
raised  in  vain  but  emphatic  protest.  It  was  that  of  the 
Count  of  Mirabeau,  the  one  man  who  in  these  constitu- 


THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY  23 

tional  debates  displayed   any  statesmanlike  knowledge 
and  grasp. 

Honore  Gabriel  Riqueti,  Comte  de  Mirabeau,1  is  beyond  Mirabeau 
comparison  the  most  notable  figure  in  the  early  history 
of  the  French  Revolution.  Born  in  1748  he  ought  to 
have  been  in  the  prime  of  manhood  when  elected  to  the 
States-general,  but  violent  excesses  of  every  kind  had 
not  merely  undermined  a  robust  constitution  but  had 
inspired  general  mistrust  of  his  character.  Rejected  as 
a  deputy  by  his  own  Order  he  was  elected  by  the  Tiers 
ttat  both  at  Marseilles  and  at  Aix,  and  as  deputy  for  Aix 
he  took  his  seat  in  1789.  Regarded  with  suspicion  and 
received  with  insults  his  splendid  eloquence  and  ripe 
political  judgment  quickly  impressed  the  Assembly.  His 
courage  and  resource  in  the  crisis  of  23rd  June  established 
his  pre-eminence  among  a  crowd  of  inexperienced  medio- 
crities, and  from  that  day  until  his  death  he  mostly  domi- 
nated the  Constituent  Assembly. 

What  was  Mirabeau's  political  creed  ?  At  what  did  he 
aim  ?  For  the  philosophic  abstractions  of  Lafayette  and 
the  windy  rhetoric  of  the  Rights  of  Man  Mirabeau  had 
nothing  but  contempt,  while  the  work  of  4th  August  was 
to  him  a  "  mere  orgy  ".  But  with  the  Ancien  Regime  he 
had  no  sympathy,  and  his  supreme  desire  was  to  convince 
the  King  that  the  breach  with  the  past  was  irreparable 
and  to  reconcile  him  to  the  new  order.  Not  that  he 
desired  any  weakening  of  the  executive  authority.  On 
the  contrary,  a  strong  executive  was  to  his  mind  the  first 
necessity  of  government,  but  its  strength  must  be  de- 
rived from  the  willing  assent  of  the  people  and  from  har- 
monious co-operation  with  the  people's  representatives  in 
the  Assembly.  In  fine,  Mirabeau  desired  to  see  in  France 

1  For  biography  cf.  P.  F.  Willert :  Mirabeau.     (Foreign  States- 
men Series.) 


24  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

a  Constitutional  Monarchy  of  the  English  type,  with 
which  he  had  become  familiar  and  which  he  fervently 
admired.  Even  to  Mirabeau,  however,  the  Assembly  on 
this  subject  refused  to  listen.  But  the  leadership  of  the 
Revolution  was  soon  to  pass  from  the  Assembly. 
March  Early  in  October  the  news  reached  Paris  that  the 

Maenads,  Court  at  Versailles  was  contemplating  a  counter-re- 
Octobwdth  v°luti°n-  The  King,  it  was  rumoured,  was  to  withdraw 
to  Metz,  and  Paris  was  to  be  overawed  by  faithful  troops. 
A  military  banquet  at  Versailles  gave  substance  to  the 
rumours.  A  huge  mob,  headed  by  a  band  of  frenzied 
women,  marched  out  from  Paris  to  Versailles  on  5th 
October,  attacked  the  Palace,  and  on  the  6th  carried  the 
King  and  the  royal  family  back  with  them  to  Paris 
virtually  as  prisoners.  The  National  Assembly  followed 
the  King,  and  thus  the  control  of  the  revolutionary  move- 
ment passed  into  the  hands  of  radical  clubs  and  the  popu- 
lace of  Paris. 

The  new  In  Paris  the  work  of  Constitution-making  was  resumed 
tion  in  grim  earnest  by  the  Assembly.  Local  government 
was  entirely  reorganised :  the  old  Provinces  were  abolished, 
and  France  was  symmetrically  mapped  out  into  eighty- 
three  Departments.  The  Departments  were  subdivided 
into  Districts,  Cantons,  and  Communes  or* Municipalities. 
The  last  numbered  44,000.  In  every  department,  dis- 
trict and  commune  there  was  an  elected  council  with  its 
executive  officers.  The  electoral  franchise  was  conferred 
upon  all "  active  "  citizens,  i.e.,  all  citizens  over  twenty-five 
years  of  age  who  paid  in  direct  taxes  a  sum  equal  to 
three  days'  labour.  Office  was  open  to  all  who  paid 
direct  taxes  to  the  amount  of  a  silver  mark.  The  ad- 
ministration of  justice  was  thoroughly  overhauled.  The 
Parlements  and  other  courts  were  swept  away,  with 
many  of  the  abuses  attendant  upon  them — arbitrary  im- 


THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY  25 

prisonment,  for  example,  and  excessive  punishments. 
A  criminal  court  was  established  in  every  department, 
and  in  these  trial  by  jury  was  introduced ;  a  civil  court 
in  every  district ;  and  besides  these  numberless  courts  of 
summary  jurisdiction  under  juges  de  paix.  At  Paris 
there  was  to  be  a  court  of  appeal.  Unfortunately,  a 
judicial  system  otherwise  admirable  was  vitiated  by  the 
mania  for  election  which  pervaded  the  whole  body  of  re- 
forms effected  by  the  Assembly.  Firmness  and  imparti- 
ality could  not  be  expected  from  judges  who  held  office — 
and  for  short  terms  only — by  popular  election.  Military 
reforms  were  carried  out  with  equal  thoroughness.  The 
number  of  highly  paid  officers  was  reduced ;  the  pay  of 
the  private  was  improved  and  all  ranks  were  made 
eligible  for  promotion.  Privilege  of  every  kind  was,  of 
course,  doomed.  Hereditary  titles  of  nobility  were  sup- 
pressed, while  at  the  other  end  of  the  scale  the  slaves 
of  St.  Domingo  were  summarily  emancipated.  But  not 
even  revolutionary  fervour  could  sustain  the  burden  of 
government  without  money,  and  money  was  difficult  to 
come  by.  Necker  had  come  to  the  end  of  his  tether  in 
regard  to  loans,  and  his  income  tax  of  5s.  in  the  £  proved 
a  failure.  Under  these  circumstances  greedy  eyes  were 
turned  to  the  property  of  the  Church.  The  cures  were 
ill  paid,  but  the  wealth  of  the  high  Ecclesiastics  and  the 
religious  houses  was  enormous.  Tithes  were  abolished 
(to  the  sole  advantage  of  the  landowners)  on  4th  August, 
1789.  In  1790  the  religious  houses  were  suppressed, 
and  all  Church  property  throughout  France  was  appro- 
priated by  the  State.  To  meet  immediate  necessities 
assignats  or  promissory  notes  were  issued  upon  the 
security  of  the  Church  property.  The  Church  itself  be- 
came a  State-department,  and  a  "  civil  constitution  "  was 
imposed  upon  the  Clergy.  Here  again  everything  was 


26  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

sacrificed  to  mathematical  symmetry  and  the  mania  for 
election.  Every  department  was  to  have  a  bishop,  every 
district  a  cure,  in  each  case  elected  by  their  flock,  and  the 
papal  veto  on  such  elections  was  done  away  with.  At 
the  same  time  gross  inequalities  of  income  were  redressed. 
The  scheme  was  not  without  merits,  and  though  hotly 
resisted  by  the  Clergy  and  unsanctioned  by  the  Pope, 
might  have  formed  the  basis  of  a  settlement  but  for  an 
act  of  egregious  and  gratuitous  folly.  The  Assembly  in- 
sisted that  every  clergyman  should  take  an  oath  of  allegi- 
ance to  the  new  system.  At  least  half  refused,  the 
Church  of  France  was  rent  in  twain,  and  the  new  Govern- 
ment converted  possible  adherents  into  implacable  op- 
ponents. 

It  remained  to  define  the  relations  of  the  single- 
chamber  legislature  to  the  executive.  Partly  in  deference 
to  the  theories  of  Montesquieu,  partly  in  acceptance  of 
American  as  against  English  precedent,  most  of  all  from 
ineradicable  suspicion  of  the  Crown  and  the  Court,  the 
Assembly  resolved  that  no  executive  minister  or  holder  of 
office  under  the  Crown  should  be  a  member  of  the  legis- 
lature. Mirabeau,  in  accordance  with  his  known  principles, 
strove  earnestly  to  avert  this  divorce,  but  in  vain  ;  and  his 
failure  removed  the  last  hope  of  reconciliation  between 
the  Crown  and  the  National  Assembly,  the  last  hope 
that  constitutional  reform  might  be  effected  without 
destructive  revolution. 

Foiled  in  the  Assembly  Mirabeau  did  all  that  in  him 
lay  by  a  series  of  memoranda 1  characterised  by  remarkable 
shrewdness  and  insight  to  guide  the  steps  of  the  King  and 
to  save  the  monarchy.  His  first  plan  was  the  formation 

1  Cf.  Mirabeau  :  Correspondence  avec  le  Comte  de  la  Marck.     (Paris 
1851.) 


THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY  27 

of  a  "  Responsible  "  ministry  which  should  command  the 
confidence  both  of  the  Crown  and  of  the  Extreme  Left. 
But  the  materials  for  such  a  ministry  did  not  exist. 
Quick  to  recognise  his  failure,  Mirabeau's  next  plan  was 
to  induce  the  King  to  unite  France  against  Paris.  The 
advice  was  at  once  sagacious  and  bold,  but  the  execution 
of  the  scheme  needed  organising  genius  of  the  first  order. 
Where  could  the  Court  find  agents  fit  for  the  task  ? 
Mirabeau  himself  was  not  fully  trusted  by  the  Court,  and 
the  golden  opportunity  which  he  and  he  alone  might 
have  seized  was  lost. 

But  despite  his  failure  Mirabeau's  political  ascendancy 
seemed  to  be  never  more  unquestioned  than  in  the  last 
months  of  his  tempestuous  career.  In  December  he 
was  elected  President  of  the  Jacobin  Club,  and  on  30th 
January,  President  of  the  Assembly.  On  2nd  April,  1791, 
he  died.  Carlyle  confidently  affirms  that  "  had  Mirabeau 
lived,  the  history  of  France  and  of  the  world  had  been 
different ".  It  is  far  from  certain ;  but  no  one  can  ques- 
tion the  accuracy  of  Mirabeau's  own  prediction  :  "  When  I 
am  gone  they  will  know  what  the  value  of  me  was.  The 
miseries  I  have  held  back  will  burst  from  all  sides  on 
France.  I  carry  in  my  heart  the  death-dirge  of  the 
French  monarchy :  they  will  fight  over  its  corpse."  The 
one  real  statesman  in  France  was  dead :  whether  even  he 
could  have  saved  the  monarchy  and  averted  the  deluge 
that  followed  it  is  impossible  to  say.  It  is  certain  that 
no  one  else  could. 

From  this  moment  the  King  seems  to  have  realised  the  Flight  to 
hopelessness  of  his  position.      On  18th  April   1791  heVarenDes 
attempted  to  leave  Paris  for  S.  Cloud,  but  was  stopped  and 
turned  back  by  the  mob.     His  one  hope  now  was  to  get 
away  from  the  capital.     On  20th  June  the  royal  family 


28  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

left  Paris  secretly  for  Metz,  but  the  affair  was  shamefully 
bungled,  they  were  stopped  at  Varennes  and  brought 
back — virtually  prisoners — to  the  capital. 

It  is  at  this  moment  that  the  project  of  a  Republic 
comes  distinctly  into  view.  Robespierre l  and  Danton 2 
demanded  the  deposition  of  the  King,  but  the  proposal 
commanded  only  thirty  votes  in  the  Assembly,  and  it 
was  decided  to  suspend  the  King  provisionally  until  the 
Constituent  Assembly  should  have  completed  its  labours. 
The  extremists  resented  this  decision  and  organised  a 
republican  demonstration  for  17th  July.  Bailly,  the 
Mayor  of  Paris,  and  Lafayette  as  commander  of  the 
National  Guard  attempted  to  carry  out  the  orders  of  the 
Assembly  and  maintain  order.  The  mob  refused  to 
disperse ;  the  soldiers  fired,  and  twelve  people  were  killed 
and  many  wounded.  This  unfortunate  collision,  commonly 
known  as  the  "  Massacre  of  the  Champ  de  Mars,"  widened 
the  breach  between  the  Assembly  and  the  Parisian  mob. 
But  the  work  of  the  Constituent  Assembly  was  now  com- 
plete :  on  21st  September  the  new  Constitution  received 
the  assent  of  the  King ;  Louis  swore  to  maintain  it  and 
was  reinstated  in  office.  On  30th  September,  1791,  the 
Assembly  was  dissolved. 

The  work  of  the  Constituent  Assembly  has  been 
severely  criticised  and  not  without  warrant.  The  mem- 
bers were,  of  course,  utterly  lacking  in  experience  of 
affairs;  they  were  the  slaves  of  certain  philosophical 
theories,  and  were  inspired  by  a  mania  for  the  principle 
of  popular  election ;  they  declined  to  listen  to  the  saga- 
cious advice  of  the  one  statesman  among  them,  and  they 
fell  into  innumerable  pitfalls.  But  there  is  no  reason  to 

1  Cf.  Belloc's  Life  or  Morley's  Essay,  ap.  Miscellanies,  Yol.  I. 

2  Cf.  Life  by  Beesley  or  Belloc. 


THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY  29 

question  their  honesty  or  patriotism,  or  to  doubt  that 
they  were  inspired  by  a  genuine  desire  to  secure  for 
France  a  new  Constitution  modelled  upon  the  most  ap- 
proved principles  of  political  science.  Moreover,  practi- 
cally all  their  civil  as  apart  from  their  political  creations 
have  stood  the  test  of  time.  It  was  their  misfortune 
rather  than  their  fault  that  they  were  men  of  theory 
engaged  upon  the  hopeless  task  of  devising  popular 
institutions  for  a  nation  which  had  had  no  training  in 
the  supremely  difficult  art  of  self-government. 

The   new   Assembly  known   as   the  Legislative,  met  £he 
on  1st  October,  1791.     It  consisted  of  a  single  chamber  Assembly 
of   745   members    entirely   new   to   political  life.     For 
by    an    act   of    self-abnegating    folly    the    Constituent 
had  concluded  its  labours  by  passing  a  decree  that  none 
of  its   members  should   be   eligible  for   election  to  the 
new  chamber.     Once   again,  therefore,  the  destinies  of 
France  were  committed  to  men,  mostly  young  lawyers, 
who  were  full  of  theories  but  devoid  of  experience. 

Parties  quickly  defined  themselves  in  the  new  chamber. 
The  Right  consisted  of  the  Constitutionalists — better 
known  as  the  Feuillants,  a  name  derived  from  their  club 
which  met  in  the  Convent  of  the  Feuillants.  They  posed 
as  the  defenders  of  the  Constitution  of  1791  and  main- 
tained friendly  relations  with  the  Court.  They  rested 
on  the  support  of  Lafayette,  the  National  Guard  and  the 
middle  classes.  The  King's  best  policy  would  have  been 
to  give  them  his  confidence,  and  to  support  as  far  as 
possible  their  policy.  The  Left  was  divided  into  two 
factions,  both  of  them  frankly  republican,  the  Girondins 
and  the  Jacobins.  The  latter,  numerically  the  weaker, 
derived  much  strength  from  the  support  of  Paris  and 
particularly  of  the  clubs.  At  the  Jacobin  Club  Robespierre 


30  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

was  supreme;  Danton  and  Camille  Desmoulins  swayed 
the  destinies  of  the  Cordeliers,  while  the  lusty  brewer  San- 
terre  exploited  the  canaille  of  the  Paris  faubourgs  in  the 
interest  of  the  extreme  republican  party.  Within  the 
chamber  the  most  distinguished,  and  at  first  the  most  in- 
fluential of  the  many  groups  into  which  the  Left  was 
divided  was  that  of  the  Girondins. 

CHroiidins  This  famous  group  derived  its  name  from  the  fact  that 
its  leaders  came  from  the  department  of  the  Gironde. 
Among  them  were  such  men  as  Vergniaud,  their  most 
brilliant  orator,  Brissot,  the  editor  of  the  Patriote,  with 
some  knowledge  of  foreign  affairs,  Condorcet,  the  philo- 
sopher, Guadet  and  Gensonne.  Madame  Roland  repre- 
sented the  party  outside  the  Assembly.  Their  ardent 
republicanism  was  based  on  classical  models ;  they  were 
highly  gifted,  full  of  fiery  eloquence,  and  totally  devoid 
of  experience.  They  soon  became  (as  Von  Sybel  says) 
"  the  darlings  of  all  those  zealous  patriots  for  whom  the 
Cordeliers  were  too  dirty,  and  the  Feuillants  too  luke- 
warm ". 

The  new  chamber  was  confronted  by  a  score  of  difficul- 
ties ;  among  the  most  pressing  were  those  presented  by 
the  position  of  the  Non-juring  Clergy  and  of  the  Nobles 
who  had  fled  from  France. 

The  Non-  Many  of  the  Clergy  had,  as  we  have  seen,  refused  to 
and  the  take  the  oath  imposed  by  the  Constituent  Assembly,  but 
supported  by  their  flocks  they  still  continued  to  perform 
their  duties.  Consequently  in  November,  1791,  a  Decree 
was  passed  ordering  the  expulsion  of  all  priests  who  re- 
fused the  oath,  but  the  King  interposed  his  veto  and  the 
Decree  never  became  law.  A  similar  fate  attended  a  second 
Decree  (27th  May,  1792)  authorising  the  departments  to 
banish  all  Non-jurors.  The  confusion,  therefore,  was 


THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY  31 

unrelieved,  and  the  only  result  was  further  to  alienate  the 
Clergy  and  such  of  the  people  as  remained  devoted  to  them. 

Still  more  difficult  was  the  problem  presented  by  the 
position  of  the  Emigres.  From  the  early  days  of  the 
Revolution  a  steady  stream  of  French  nobles  had  poured 
over  the  German  frontier.  The  conduct  of  these  men 
was  despicable.  By  sticking  to  their  posts  they  might 
have  done  something  to  stem  the  tide  of  revolution,  or 
by  frankly  accepting  the  new  situation  they  might  have 
guided  a  movement  which  they  could  no  longer  control. 
Instead  of  this,  they  fled  shrieking  into  Germany  to  im- 
plore the  help  of  foreigners  to  arrest  the  progress  of 
revolution.  Their  conduct  at  this  crisis  must  be  held 
largely  responsible  for  the  outbreak  of  war,  for  the  ex- 
cesses of  the  reign  of  terror,  and  for  the  murder  of  the 
King.  At  Coblentz  they  established  a  miniature  Court 
over  which  the  King's  brothers,  the  Count  of  Provence 
(afterwards  Louis  XVIII.)  and  the  Count  of  Artois 
(afterwards  Charles  X.)  presided.  They  organised  also 
a  regular  army.  The  Assembly  was  seriously  alarmed. 
A  Decree  was  passed  with  the  King's  assent  requiring 
the  Count  of  Provence  to  return  to  France  within  two 
months ;  a  second  was  proposed  declaring  that  all 
Emigre's  still  in  arms  on  the  1st  January,  1792,  should 
be  punishable  with  death  as  traitors  to  France  and  their 
property  be  confiscate  to  the  State.  The  King  vetoed 
this  Decree  though  he  urged  the  Emigres  to  return. 

Meanwhile  the  Emigres  continued  their  appeals  to  the 
German  Powers  to  arrest  by  force  of  arms  a  movement 
which  threatened  not  France  only  but  every  constituted 
Government  in  Europe. 

The  response  to  this  appeal  opens  a  new  chapter  in  the 
history  of  the  Revolution. 


OF   TH£T        ' 

1 1  KM  \/ err- 


CHAPTER  IV 

EUKOPE  AND  THE  REVOLUTION 

X 

No  Monarchy,  limited  or  unlimited,  nor  any  of  the  old  Re- 
publics, can  possibly  be  safe  as  long  as  this  strange,  nameless,  wild 
enthusiastic  thing  is  established  in  the  centre  of  Europe.  ...  It 
is  with  an  armed  doctrine  that  we  are  at  war. — BURKE. 

The  war  T  S  it  possible  that  under  any  circumstances  the  Revolu- 
-L  tionary  movement  started  in  1789  could  have  been 
confined  to  France  ?  The  question  thus  stated  has  been 
variously  answered.  We  can  only  point  to  the  fact  that 
the  conflagration  lighted  in  Paris  quickly  engulphed  the 
whole  of  Europe  in  the  vortex  of  flames. 

For  this  development  there  were  many  reasons,  (i) 
The  doctrines  proclaimed  by  the  National  Assembly  and 
adopted  by  the  Legislative  Assembly  which  followed 
were,  if  true  at  all,  of  universal  validity.  They  asserted 
the  rights  not  of  Frenchmen  or  Germans,  but  of  man  as 
man.  Hence  there  was  no  reason  why  their  acceptance 
should  be  confined  within  political  frontiers,  (ii)  The 
Girondins  who  rapidly  mounted  to  supreme  power  in  the 
autumn  of  1791  were  bent  on  war  partly  "  to  make  all 
tyrants  tremble  on  their  thrones  of  clay,"  partly  as  the 
best  hope  of  consummating  the  Revolution  at  home. 
From  the  first,  therefore,  they  did  everything  in  their 
power  to,  provoke  a  breach  between  France  and  her 
neighbours.  (iii)  On  no  side  of  France  were  there 

32 


EUROPE  AND  THE  REVOLUTION       33 

barriers  strong  enough  to  resist  the  tide  of  revolutionary 
sentiment.  Most  of  the  Governments  of  Central  Europe 
were  hopelessly  decadent.  Germany  presented  a  sorry 
spectacle  of  weakness  and  disunion.  Its  two  leading 
powers,  Austria  and  Prussia,  were  deadly  rivals;  its 
political  constitution  had  for  centuries  been  entirely 
ineffective ;  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  had  long  since 
ceased  to  be  "  either  Holy,  Roman,  or  an  Empire,"  while 
in  few  of  the  hundreds  of  states  ruled  by  sovereign 
princes  was  there  any  stirring  of  a  healthy  national  life. 
Worst  of  all,  perhaps,  were  the  ecclesiastical  states  on  the 
Rhine  and  its  tributaries.  And  while  the  Governments 
were  rotten,  the  people  were  ready  to  welcome  the  prin- 
ciples proclaimed  in  France.  Particularly  was  this  the 
case  in  the  Austrian  Netherlands,  in  the  Rhine  elector- 
ates and  (in  less  degree)  in  the  United  Provinces. 

No  sovereign  could  be  indifferent  to  the  events  taking 
place  in  France,  or  deaf  to  the  appeals  of  the  emigrant 
nobles,  least  of  all  the  Emperor  Leopold.  As  Head  of 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  and  still  more  as  a  ruler  of  the 
Austrian  Netherlands,  he  was  peculiarly  exposed  to  the 
revolutionary  infection ;  as  brother  of  the  Queen  Marie 
Antoinette  he  had  good  reason  to  fear  for  the  safety  of 
his  relatives.  But  Leopold  was  a  calm  and  sagacious 
statesman,  and  clearly  realised  that  nothing  would  be 
more  likely  to  inflame  passions  in  France  than  foreign 
intervention. 

In  August,  1791,  the  Emperor  and  the  King  of  Prussia  Declaration 
(Frederick  William  II.)  met  at  Pilnitz.     They  rejected of  Pilnitz 
the  appeal  of   the  Emigres  for  immediate  intervention, 
and  refused  to  let  them  use  their  asylum  in  Germany  for 
making   armed   preparations   against   France.      At   the 
same  time  the  two  monarchs  unfortunately  issued  the 
3 


34  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Declaration  of  Pilnitz.  This  famous  document  maintained 
that  the  position  of  the  King  in  France  was  a  matter  of 
concern  to  all  European  sovereigns.  It  demanded  that  the 
Princes  of  the  Empire  should  be  reinstated  in  their  feudal 
rights,  and  it  expressed  the  intention  of  the  German 
monarchs,  if  other  nations  concurred,  to  attain  their 
objects  by  force  of  arms.  The  Emperor  was  aware  that 
England  would  not  concur,  but  he  foolishly  imagined  that 
the  empty  threat  launched  from  Pilnitz  would  suffice  to 
bring  the  extremists  in  Paris  to  reason. 

It  had  precisely  the  opposite  effect.  It  played  into 
the  hands  of  the  Girondists  and  lashed  into  fury  the  ex- 
treme republicans  who,  like  Robespierre,  were  against 
war.  Unfortunately  Leopold  died  in  1792,  and  in  March, 
1792,  Louis  formed  a  Girondist  ministry,  the  portfolio 
of  the  interior  being  given  to  the  husband  of  Madame 
Roland,  and  that  of  foreign  affairs  to  the  able  but  un- 
scrupulous Dumouriez.  At  the  latter's  bidding  the  King 
announced  to  the  Assembly  amid  immense  enthusiasm 
that  he  had  declared  war  on  Austria  (20th  April,  1792). 

The  declaration  was  immediately  followed  by  an  attack 
upon  the  Austrian  Netherlands,  but  the  French  troops 
fled  in  panic,  and  murdered  their  own  generals.  This 
initial  fiasco  confirmed  the  prevailing  notion  that  the 
war  would  be  over  in  a  few  weeks,  that  the  disciplined 
Germans  would  sweep  aside  the  armed  mob  opposed  to 
them,  that  the  allies  would  march  straight  on  Paris, 
rescue  the  French  royal  family  and  restore  tranquillity 
to  France. 

Mob  Rule  Such  anticipations  were  absurdly  wide  of  the  mark. 
The  failure  of  French  arms  served  only  to  inflame  the 
passions  of  the  mob  against  the  King  and  still  more 
against  the  Queen,  The  Court  party  was  denounced  as 


EUKOPE  AND  THE  REVOLUTION       35 

the  "  Austrian  Committee  " ;  the  King's  Body  Guard  guar- 
anteed by  the  Constitution  was  dismissed ;  the  dregs  of 
the  populace  were  armed  with  pikes,  and  insults  were 
daily  offered  to  the  Queen.  On  20th  June  a  mob  of 
armed  ruffians  burst  into  the  palace  of  the  Tuileries,  and 
for  four  hours  surged  round  the  King.  The  lives  of  the 
King  and  Queen  were  saved  only  by  their  own  calm  and 
dignified  courage.  This  outrage  roused  the  Constitution- 
alists in  defence  of  the  Crown  and  produced  a  decided 
though  transient  reaction.  Lafayette  left  his  troops  on 
the  frontier  and  hurried  back  to  Paris  to  defend  the  King. 
But  the  Jacobins  flouted  his  demands,  the  King  mistrusted 
his  goodwill,  and  things  rapidly  went  from  bad  to  worse. 

On  llth  July,  after  a  speech  of  fiery  eloquence  froniBruns- 
Vergniaud,  the  Assembly  declared  that  the  country  was  Manifesto 
in  danger ;  on  25th  July  Prussia  formally  declared  war, 
and  a  few  days  later  the  Prussian  commander,  the  Duke 
of  Brunswick,  issued  from  Coblentz  a  manifesto  to  the 
French  people.  He  summoned  all  authorities  in  France 
to  submit  to  their  lawful  sovereign,  declared  that  the 
whole  French  nation  would  be  held  individually  re- 
sponsible for  any  resistance  offered  to  the  allied  armies, 
and  threatened  Paris  with  demolition  if  any  outrage  were 
committed  upon  the  King  or  royal  family.  This  foolish 
and  insolent  manifesto  sealed  the  fate  of  the  French 
monarchy.  The  reply  to  it  was  the  insurrection  of  the 
10th  of  August. 

Early  in  June  the  King  had  vetoed  a  Decree  for  the  The  tenth 
assembling  of   a  force   of  20,000  federes  or   provincial of  August 
volunteers  in  Paris,  and  on  the  13th  had  dismissed  his 
Girondist  ministers.     Despite  the  veto  a  force  of  federes 
marched  from  Marseilles  and  at  the  end  of  July  arrived  in 
Paris  singing  the  new  national  hymn — the  "  Marseillaise  " 


36  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

—and  determined  to  "  strike  down  the  tyrant ".  Mean- 
while (9th  August)  the  popular  leaders  set  up  a  new 
Commune  (or  municipal  government)  and  on  the  same 
night  sounded  the  tocsin  of  insurrection  throughout  Paris. 
Mandat,  the  brave  commander  of  the  National  Guard,  was 
murdered ;  the  Tuileries  were  invaded ;  the  Swiss  Guard 
was  massacred,  and  the  King,  with  his  family,  took  re- 
fuge in  the  Assembly.  There  on  the  10th  of  August  a 
remnant  of  terror-stricken  deputies  decreed  the  suspen- 
sion of  the  monarchy.  The  King  was  sent  as  a  prisoner 
to  the  Temple;  a  camp  was  formed  under  the  walls  of 
Paris ;  the  Girondist  ministers  were  restored ;  Danton — 
the  real  author  of  the  10th  of  August  —  became  the 
Minister  of  Justice,  and  a  National  Convention,  to  be 
elected  by  universal  manhood  suffrage,  was  summoned  to 
meet  immediately. 

Advance  of     On  19th  August  the  allied  army  crossed  the  Rhine; 

the  Allies  Qn  the  20th  LongWV  was  invested;  on  the  24th  it  capitu- 
lated and  on  the  30th  the  invaders  reached  Verdun. 
Lafayette  refusing  to  recognise  the  new  authority  in 
Paris  was  declared  a  traitor,  took  refuge  with  the  allies, 
and  was  succeeded  by  Dumouriez.  The  best  chance  of 
the  allies  would  have  been  a  bold  and  rapid  advance  on 
Paris.  Brunswick,  their  commander,  was  a  fine  strategist 
of  the  old  school,  but  the  situation  demanded  more  than 
strategy.  Brunswick  would  risk  nothing,  advanced  with 
caution  and  slowly  pushed  Dumouriez  back.  The  golden 
opportunity  was  lost. 

TheSep-  Meanwhile,  terrible  scenes  were  enacted  within  the 
walls  of  Paris-  Tiie  advance  of  the  allies  created  a  panic ; 
the  entire  control  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Commune ; 
Danton  became  virtual  dictator.  His  policy  was  simple. 
With  the  allies  advancing  on  Paris ;  with  more  than  half 


EUEOPE  AND  THE  EEVOLUTION       37 

France  sympathising  with  the  objects  they  were  coming 
to  achieve,  the  one  path  of  safety  for  the  republican 
minority  was  to  strike  terror  into  the  hearts  of  their 
opponents. 

"  In  my  opinion,"  said  Danton,  "  the  way  to  stop  the 
enemy  is  to  make  the  Royalists  fear."  The  surrender  of 
Verdun  (2nd  September)  opened  the  road  to  Paris,  and 
on  the  same  day  massacres  began  in  prisons  already 
crowded  with  Royalists.  For  five  long  days  the  prisoners 
were  handed  over  to  the  tender  mercies  of  a  band  of 
cut-throats.  There  was  no  discrimination  of  rank,  sex 
or  age.  Men,  women  and  children,  bishops  and  priests, 
nobles  and  magistrates, — all  who  were  suspected  of  Roy- 
alist leanings  were  foully  murdered  with  the  added 
mockery  of  judicial  forms.  The  number  of  victims  is 
variously  estimated  from  2,000  to  10,000.  Marat  in- 
vited the  provinces  to  follow  the  brilliant  example  of 
Paris. 

In  fairness  it  must  be  added  that  in  the  midst  of  the 
massacres  Danton  threw  himself  with  splendid  energy 
into  the  task  of  organising  tlm  National  Defence.  The 
cannonade  of  Valmy  (20th  SepMnber)  checked  Brunswick 
and  saved  the  capital.  With  Valmy  the  tide  turned ;  on 
the  6th  of  November  Dumouriez  won  a  brilliant  victory 
on  the  Belgian  frontier  at  Jemappes ;  Mons,  Brussels  and 
Antwerp  surrendered  in  turn ;  the  French  armies  were 
welcomed  by  the  populace  as  friends,  and  the  Austrian 
Netherlands  were  in  the  hands  of  the  French  Republic. 

Similar  success  attended  the  army  of  Custine  on  the 
Rhine:  Mainz,  Speier,  Worms,  Frankfort  and  Coblentz 
opened  their  gates  to  the  French  (October).  Not  less  en- 
thusiastic was  their  welcome  on  the  Southern  frontiers. 
General  Montesquieu  occupied  Savoy,  and  General 


38  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Anselme  Nice.  Thus  before  the  winter  of  1792-93  closed 
in,  the  armies  of  the  Republic  were  in  possession  of 
Belgium,  Savoy  and  Nice,  and  had  got  a  firm  grip  on 
the  middle  Rhine. 

The  Success  upon  the  frontiers  naturally  quickened  the  pace 

Convention  in  the  capital.  The  Legislative  Assembly  had  dissolved 
itself  and  had  summoned  a  National  Convention  to  frame 
a  new  Constitution  for  France.  The  Convention  was 
opened  on  21st  September,  and  resolved  by  acclamation 
that  "  royalty  was  abolished  in  France,"  and  that  Year  I. 
of  the  Republic  should  date  from  that  day.  A  decree 
of  perpetual  banishment  was  passed  against  the  Emigres, 
and  it  was  resolved  to  bring  the  King  to  trial  before  the 
Convention. 
Execution  The  trial  opened  on  llth  December.  The  Girondists 

of  the  King 

attempted  to  interpose  delays,  and  suggested  that  the 
King's  fate  should  be  decided  by  a  vote  of  the  whole 
nation.  But  the  mob  became  impatient;  on  14th  January, 
1793,  they  surrounded  the  Convention  with  cries  of 
"  Death  to  the  tyrant,"  and  two  days  later  Louis  XVI. 
was  by  a  narrow  majority  sentenced  to  death.  On  21st 
January  the  sentence  was  executed.  Thus  died  upon  the 
scaffold,  with  calm  courage  and  unruffled  dignity,  one  of 
the  kindliest,  most  unselfish  and  best-intentioned  of 
French  kings.  Unfortunately  he  was  as  weak  as  he  was 
good.  A  really  strong  king  might  have  dissociated  him- 
self from  the  privileged  orders  and  led  the  movement 
along  the  path  of  ordered  reform.  But  Louis  XVI.  was 
incapable  of  initiative,  and  not  wise  enough  to  profit  by 
the  advice  of  the  one  counsellor  who  might  have  supplied 
his  deficiency.  Personally  well  meaning  he  fell  upon  evil 
days  and  had  not  sufficient  force  of  character  to  "  direct 
the  whirlwind  "  or  "  to  ride  the  storm  ".  His  execution 


EUROPE  AND  THE  REVOLUTION       39 

was  both  a  crime  and  a  blunder.  "  Louis  must  die,"  said 
Robespierre,  "  because  the  country  must  live."  The 
dilemma  was  imaginary ;  and  posterity  has  endorsed  with 
rare  unanimity  the  dictum  of  Charles  James  Fox — "a 
most  revolting  act  of  cruelty  and  injustice." 


CHAPTER  V 

ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE 

THE  REIGN  OF  TERROR 

I  detest  the  French  Revolution  in  the  act,  in  the  spirit,  in  the 
consequence,  and  most  of  all  in  the  example. — BURKE. 

He  pitied  the  plumage,  but  forgot  the  dying  bird. — TOM  PAINE 
ON  BURKE. 

The  jPropa-  'HT^HE  execution  of  Louis  XVI.  sent  a  thrill  of  horror 
Decrees  -*-  through  Europe,  but  it  could  not  in  itself  justify 
foreign  intervention.  The  Revolution,  however,  was 
changing  its  character.  Intoxicated  by  success  the 
republicans,  in  the  autumn  of  1792,  had  challenged  the 
existing  order  in  Europe  at  large.  They  had  already 
declared  the  navigation  of  the  Scheldt  open,  and  issued 
two  propagandist  Decrees  calling  upon  all  peoples  to  rise 
in  revolt  against  their  rulers.  The  importance  of  the 
Decree  of  15th  December,  1792,  justifies  quotation  : — 

"  The  French  nation  will  treat  as  enemies  the  people 
who,  refusing  or  renouncing  liberty  and  equality,  are 
desirous  of  preserving  their  prince  and  privileged  castes, 
or  of  entering  into  communication  with  them.  The 
nation  promises  and  engages  never  to  lay  down  its  arms 
until  the  sovereignty  and  liberty  of  the  people  on  whose 
territory  the  French  armies  shall  have  entered,  shall  be 
established.  It  is  evident  that  a  people  so  enamoured  of 

40 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  41 

its  chains,  and  so  obstinately  attached  to  its  state  of 
brutishness  as  to  refuse  the  restoration  of  its  rights,  is 
the  accomplice  not  only  of  its  own  despots,  but  even  of 
all  its  crowned  usurpers,  who  divide  the  domain  of  the 
earth  and  of  men.  Such  a  servile  people  is  the  declared 
enemy  of  the  French  Republic." 

Such  conduct  rendered  the  maintenance  of  neutrality 
difficult  if  not  impossible.  England  was  particularly 
embarrassed  by  the  opening  of  the  Scheldt,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  the  French  occupation  ,of  Belgium.  Always 
sensitive  in  regard  to  Antwerp  she  had  specifically 
guaranteed  in  the  interests  of  Holland  the  closing  of  the 
Scheldt,1  and  the  action  of  the  Convention  consequently 
compelled  serious  notice. 

So  far  the  Government  of  England  had  shown  no  hos-  England 
tility  to  the  Revolutionary  movement.    Some  people  took  volution  e 
the  cynical  view  of  Lord  Chesterfield,  that  if  France  were 
kept  well  occupied  at  home  "  the  rest  of  Europe  would 
be  quiet".     Others  welcomed  its  early  stages  as  likely 
to  procure  for  France  the  advantages — long  enjoyed  in 
England — of  a  limited  monarchy.    Some  were  flattered  to 
trace  in  its  progress  the  influence  of  English  writers,  more 
particularly  Locke.     A  few,  like  Charles  James  Fox,  were 
excited  to  enthusiasm  even  by  its  more  violent  episodes. 

Unquestionably  the  first  effect  of  the  Revolution  was  to 
encourage  the  political  societies  and  clubs  which  had 
come  into  existence  during  the  American  war.  Among 
these  the  "  Revolution  Society  "  obtained  some  notoriety 
— after  the  manner  of  unimportant  busybodies — by  send- 
ing an  address  of  congratulation  to  the  National  Assembly 
(November,  1789).  To  this  society  was  addressed  the 

1I.e.,  that  no  goods  should  be  brought  up  the  river  except  in 
Dutch  ships,  or  on  payment  of  dues  to  the  Dutch. 


42  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

sermon  which  Burke  took  as  the  text  of  his  Reflections 
upon  the  French  Revolution,  a  fact  which  has  secured  to 
Dr.  Price,  the  preacher,  a  spurious  immortality. 
Burke's  Burke  made  from  the  first  no  secret  of  the  anxiety  and 
18  abhorrence  with  which  he  regarded  the  "course  of  events 
in  France,  and  in  November,  1790,  he  published  his 
Reflections.  In  this  famous  treatise  his  first  care  was 
to  repudiate  the  suggestion  that  France  was  merely  im- 
proving upon  the  example  set  by  England  in  1688,  and 
to  emphasise  the  contrast  between  the  cautious  and  con- 
servative advance  of  England  and  the  abstract  and  un- 
historical  radicalism  of  France.  To  give  any  idea  of 
the  exuberant  wealth  of  historical  illustration,  or  the 
profound  wisdom  of  the  political  reflections  by  the  aid  of 
which  Burke  enforced  his  main  thesis,  would  here  be  im- 
possible. But  attention  must  be  drawn  to  his  remark- 
able prediction.  The  new  system  of  government  set  up 
by  the  National  Assembly  would,  he  prophesied,  quickly 
lead  to  the  destruction  of  the  monarchy ;  the  fall  of  the 
monarchy  would  result  in  anarchy,  from  which  France 
could  only  be  rescued  by  a  military  despotism.  But 
Burke's  first  concern  was  not  for  France  but  for  his  own 
country,  and  his  treatise  has,  therefore,  been  truly  de- 
scribed as  "a  polemic  against  Jacobinism,  particularly 
English  Jacobinism".  In  both  respects  it  produced  an 
extraordinarily  powerful  effect.  Thirty  thousand  copies 
were  quickly  sold  in  England  and  a  very  large  number 
in  France  and  elsewhere.  Nor  was  the  success  unde- 
served ;  for  few  similar  treatises  have  so  effectively  com- 
bined the  character  of  a  political  pamphlet  designed  to 
produce  an  immediate  effect,  and  that  of  a  permanent 
contribution  to  political  thought. 

Not  that  Burke's  influence  was  wholly  salutary.     From 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  43 

the  outset  he  held  that  the  only  cure  for  the  highly 
contagious  disease  raging  in  France  was  the  armed 
intervention  of  the  Powers.  "  This  evil  in  the  heart  of 
Europe  must  be  extirpated  from  that  centre,  or  no  part  of 
the  circumference  can  be  free  from  the  mischief  which 
radiates  from  it,  and  which  will  spread,  circle  beyond 
circle,  in  spite  of  all  the  little  defensive  precautions  which 
can  be  employed  against  it."  Most  people  will  now  agree 
that  Burke  was  inaccurate  in  his  diagnosis  and  unfortun- 
ate in  his  prescription. 

But  despite  Burke's  advice,  Pitt  held  steadily  on  the  Pitt  and 
path  of  rigid  neutrality.  There  are  few  charges  against  tion 
any  public  man  more  demon strably  false  than  that  which 
makes  Pitt  responsible  for  the  outbreak  of  war  between 
Europe  and  France.  But  the  force  of  iteration  is  re- 
markable, and  libel  dies  hard.  To  have  introduced  a 
Peace  Budget  in  1792,  and  to  have  reduced  both  army 
and  navy,  may  argue  lack  of  prescience,  but  at  least  it 
proves  the  sincerity  of  his  aversion  to  war.  Even  after 
the  Continental  war  had  broken  out  Pitt  clung  to  the 
hope  that  Great  Britain  might  not  only  maintain  neu- 
trality, but  might  intervene  as  arbitrator  between  the 
combatants.  Such  hopes,  though  generous,  were  vain,  and 
as  the  summer  of  1792  deepened  into  autumn,  Pitt's 
struggles  for  peace,  though  never  relaxed,  grew  sensibly 
less  and  less  effective. 

On  both  sides  of  the  channel  passions  were  rising  which 
no  statesman  could  control.  The  republicans  in  Paris 
had  challenged  all  existing  Governments,  good  and  bad 
alike;  they  had  shown  their  indifference  to  existing 
obligations;  they  had  proclaimed,  in  their  Decrees,  a 
Revolutionary  crusade;  finally,  on  the  21st  of  January, 
1793,  they  sent  their  sovereign  to  the  scaffold.  The 


44  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

execution  of  Louis  XVI,  however  inconsequently,  roused 
the  war  temper  of  the  English  people.  Chauvelin,  who 
had  for  some  time  unofficially  represented  the  French 
Government  in  London,  was  sent  home,  and  on  the  1st 
of  February,  1793,  the  Convention  declared  war  upon 
England  and  Holland,  and  a  month  later  upon  Spain. 
The  War  Between  1793  and  1801  the  war  between  England 
and  France  continued  without  break.  Other  Powers 
came  in  and  fell  out;  coalitions  were  formed  and 
dissolved ;  treaties  of  peace  were  concluded,  and  wars 
were  again  declared,  but  all  the  while  the  old  rivals  held 
doggedly  on.  Even  the  treaty  concluded  at  Amiens  (1802) 
represented  nothing  more  than  a  temporary  truce ;  no 
real  peace  was  made  until  after  the  final  overthrow  of 
Napoleon  in  1815.  But  not  until  the  beginning  of  the 
Peninsular  War  (1808)  did  England  play  any  considerable 
or  continuous  part  in  the  military  operations  on  the  Con- 
tinent. This  was  Pitt's  deliberate  policy,  and  it  has  been 
abundantly  vindicated  by  the  greatest  of  modern  strat- 
egists :  "  It  was  economically  wiser,  for  the  purpose  of 
the  coalitions,"  writes  Captain  Mahan,1  "that  [Great 
Britain]  should  be  controlling  the  sea,  supporting  the 
commerce  of  the  world,  making  money  and  managing  the 
finances,  while  other  states,  whose  industries  were  exposed 
to  the  blast  of  war,  and  who  had  not  the  same  commercial 
aptitudes,  did  the  fighting  on  land."  That  in  Pitt's  con- 
duct of  the  war  there  were  serious  mistakes  in  detail 
must  be  conceded :  but  he  set  before  himself  a  definite 
aim,  and  he  pursued  it  with  dogged  tenacity  and,  on  the 
whole,  with  conspicuous  success. 

The  adhesion  of  England,  Holland  and  Spain  combined 
with  the  distracted  condition  of  France  to  secure  to  the 

1  Influence  of  Sea  Power  upon  the  French  Revolution  and  Empire. 


FRANCO-GERMAN  FRONTIER.  Campaigns  of  1793,1799,1814,1815.1871. 


Frontiers  of  I9O8 


46  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

allies  six  months  of  unbroken  military  success  (February- 
August,  1793).  ,The  Austrians  won  a  notable  victory 
over  Dumouriez  at  Neerwinden  (18th  March).  The  French 
then  evacuated  Belgium,  and  the  Austrians  crossed  the 
frontier  and  threatened  Paris.  Another  Austrian  army 
invaded  Alsace ;  the  Prussians  drove  the  French  from 
the  middle  Rhine ;  the  English,  under  the  Duke  of  York, 
besieged  Dunkirk ;  Admiral  Hood  was  admitted  into  the 
harbour  of  Toulon,  and  the  Spaniards  crossed  the  Pyrenees 
and  conquered  Roussillon.  But  these  reverses  to  French 
arms  served  only  to  increase  the  pace  of  revolution  in 
Paris  and  to  invest  its  leaders  with  the  halo  of  patriotism. 
The  desertion  of  Dumouriez,  who  took  refuge  with  the 
Austrians  after  Neerwinden,  and  the  outbreak  of  civil 
war  in  La  Vendee  tended  in  the  same  direction.  France 
was  in  danger,  and  at  all  hazards  it  was  necessary  to 
restore  unity  to  her  councils.  On  2nd  June  thirty-two 
leading  Girondists,  including  Brissot,  Vergniaud  and 
Petion,  were  arrested,  and  thus  the  struggle  between  the 
Girondists  and  the  Jacobins  was  finally  decided  in  favour 
of  the  extremer  and  more  vigorous  party.  An  extraordin- 
ary tribunal  to  judge,  without  appeal,  conspirators  against 
the  State  had  been  established  in  March ;  the  "  Committee 
of  Public  Safety,"  formed  originally  in  April  and  re- 
organised in  July,  was  invested  with  practically  supreme 
powers;  while  Carnot,  admitted  to  the  Committee  in 
August,  demanded  a  levde  en  masse,  reorganised  the  army 
and  inspired  its  administration  with  his  own  fiery 
energy.  By  the  early  autumn  he  had  750,000  men  under 
arms.  The  results  were  quickly  discernible.  The  royal- 
ist rising  in  La  Vendee  and  the  South  was  crushed ;  the 
siege  of  Dunkirk  was  raised ;  the  English  were  defeated 
at  Hondschoote  (September)  and  the  Austrians  at  Wattig- 


ENGLAND  AND  FKANCE  47 

nies  (October).  Thus  Neerwinden  was  avenged  and  all 
danger  on  the  North-eastern  frontier  was  averted.  Simul- 
taneously Alsace  was  cleared ;  the  allies  were  forced  back 
across  the  Rhine ;  and  before  the  end  of  the  year  the  great 
arsenal  of  Toulon  was  recaptured  from  the  English.  On 
every  side  the  armies  of  Carnot  were  triumphant. 

It  is  futile  to  deny  that  the  French  victories  on  the  The 
borders  were  due  to  the  triumph  of  the  Jacobins  in  the  triumph 
heart  of  France.      The  Girondins,  with  their  virtuous  *°$  th®f 
declamation  and  their  doctrinaire  republicanism  form  an  Terror 
interesting  phase  in  the  development  of  the  Revolution. 
But  they  were  unequal  to  the  stern  realities  of  war,  and 
military  reverses  sealed  their  political  doom.     The  spirit 
of  the  new  administration  was  well  expressed  by  Robes- 
pierre :    "  Tyrants   beset   us  without   our   borders ;    the 
friends  of   tyranny  conspire  within.      In  such  a   crisis 
the  principle  of  our  policy  must  be  this  :  To  govern  the 
people  by  Reason   and  the  enemies  of  the   people   by 
Terror.     Terror  is  only  justice  more  prompt,  more  vigor- 
ous, more  inexorable,  and  therefore  Virtue's  child." 

Every  interest  was  to  be  subordinated  to  that  of  the 
public  safety.  The  "young  men  shall  go  to  war;  the 
married  men  shall  forge  arms  and  transport  supplies ; 
the  wives  shall  make  tents  and  clothes  and  serve  in  the 
hospitals ;  the  children  shall  tear  old  linen  into  lint ;  the 
aged  shall  resort  to  the  public  places  to  excite  the  courage 
of  the  warriors  and  hatred  against  kings."  We  may  detest 
or  deride  the  cause  which  evoked  this  enthusiasm ;  but 
the  enthusiasm  was  genuine  and  not  unheroic.  Nothing 
must  be  permitted  to  stand  in  the  way.  Commercial 
maxims  must  be  set  at  naught,  and  the  ordinary  guaran- 
tees for  personal  liberty  must  be  suspended.  By  the 
Cf  law  of  the  maximum,"  maximum  prices  were  fixed  for 


48  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

provisions,  manufactured  goods  and  even  raw  materials. 
By  the  "law  of  the  suspects"  the  Revolutionary  com- 
mittees— not  in  Paris  only  but  throughout  France — were 
authorised  to  imprison  all  members  of  noble  families,  all 
relatives  of  Emigres,  and  all  who  by  word  or  act  or  writ- 
ing showed  sympathy  with  the  fallen  monarchy  or  the 
Ancien  Regime.  The  prisons  were,  before  long,  crammed 
to  overflowing,  and  the  congestion  was  relieved  only  by 
the  daily  procession  to  the  Place  de  la  Revolution  where 
the  guillotine  was  doing  its  ghastly  work.  "  The  guillo- 
tine, we  find,  gets  always  a  quicker  motion  as  other  things 
are  quickening.  The  guillotine,  by  its  speed  of  going, 
will  give  index  of  the  general  velocity  of  the  Republic. 
The  clanking  of  its  huge  axe  rising  and  falling  there  in 
horrid  systole  diastole.  .  .  .  Heaven  knows  there  were 
terrors  and  horrors  enough  :  yet  that  was  not  all  the 
phenomenon :  nay,  more  properly  that  was  not  the  phe- 
nomenon at  all,  but  rather  was  the  shadow  of  it,  the 
negative  part  of  it."  There  is  truth  in  Carlyle's  state- 
ment, though  the  expression  is  fantastic  and  rhetorical, 
and  despite  our  natural  and  righteous  detestation  of  the 
"  Terror "  and  its  agents,  we  must  recognise  the  vigour 
of  those  who  organised  it. 

Meanwhile  terrible  scenes  were  daily  enacted  in  Paris. 
On  the  16th  of  October  the  Queen,  Marie  Antoinette, 
went  to  the  scaffold  with  a  dignity  and  courage  not  un- 
worthy of  the  daughter  of  the  great  Hungarian  Queen, 
Maria  Theresa.  The  pathos  of  her  death  and  the  brutality 
of  her  murderers  have  thrown  a  halo  of  romance  around 
a  woman  whose  influence  was  almost  uniformly  mis- 
chievous. Marie  Antoinette  was  followed  to  the  scaffold 
by  the  twenty-two  leaders  of  the  Gironde — among  them 
Vergniaud,  Brissot  and  Madame  Roland;  by  Philippe 


ENGLAND  AND  FKANCE  49 

Egalite,1  and  by  Bailly  the  first  Mayor  of  Paris  under  the 
new  municipality,  and  first  President  of  the  States-general 
itself.  The  "  Terror  "  thus  imposed  on  Paris  was  carried 
out  with  even  greater  violence  in  the  provinces.  "  To  be 
safe,"  said  Hebert,  "you  must  kill  everybody."  A 
systematic  attempt  was  made  to  carry  out  the  prescrip- 
tion. The  Vendean  revolt  was  stamped  out  in  blood 
the  inhabitants  of  Toulon  and  Lyons  were  practically 
exterminated,  and  whole  provinces  were  handed  over  to 
military  execution  in  the  hope  of  wiping  out  a  population 
which  could  not  be  coerced  into  submission. 

Thus  was  the  supremacy  of  the  Jacobins  established. 
Before  long,  however,  divisions  began  to  manifest  them- 
selves in  the  ranks  of  the  extreme  party.  A  section  led 
by  Danton  and  inspired  by  the  Vieux  Cordelier  of  Camille 
Desmoulins  desired  to  stay  the  hand  of  vengeance  and  re- 
establish a  Government  at  once  stable  and  comparatively 
merciful.  At  the  opposite  pole  were  the  followers  of 
Hubert,  himself  the  advocate  of  unsparing  terror  and 
revolting  atheism.  It  was  the  Hebertists  who,  having 
forced  the  Convention  to  abolish  the  Catholic  religion  and 
substitute  for  it  the  worship  of  Reason,  celebrated  (10th 
November)  the  Feast  of  Reason  in  the  Cathedral  of  Notre 
Dame. 

To  the  Hebertists  Robespierre  and  his  followers  offered 
uncompromising  opposition.  "  If  God  did  not  exist,"  said 
Robespierre,  "it  would  be  necessary  to  invent  Him." 
Atheism  he  denounced  as  aristocratic.  By  an  alliance 
with  the  Dantonists  Robespierre  crushed  the  Hebertists, 
and  in  March,  1794,  Hebert  himself,  Chaumette  and 

1  Louis  Phillipe,  Duke  of  Orleans,  great-grandson  of  the  Regent 
Orleans,  and  father  of  Louis  Phillipe  who  became  King  of  the  French 
in  1830.     See  p.  137. 
4 


50  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Anarcharsis  Clootz  were  sent  to  the  guillotine.  Having 
thus  disposed  of  the  extreme  Left,  Robespierre  next  turned 
upon  the  Moderates,  and  in  April  Danton,  Camille 
Desmoulins  and  many  of  their  followers  shared  the  fate 
of  the  Hebertists.  So  Danton,  the  hero  of  Carlyle's  famous 
epic,  passes  out  of  the  story. 

TheTrium-  The  triumvirate  of  Robespierre,  Couthon  and  St.  Just 
was  now  supreme.  In  May,  1794,  the  Convention,  at  the 
instance  of  Robespierre,  resolved  to  recognise  the  exist- 
ence of  a  Supreme  Being,  and  in  June  Robespierre  him- 
self presided  over  a  blasphemous  festival  designed  in 
honour  of  the  deity  of  his  own  creation.  Two  days  after 
this  festival  Couthon  proposed  to  the  Convention  the 
famous  Law  of  the  22nd  Prairial  (10th  June) — a  law 
designed  to  increase  the  murderous  efficiency  of  the 
Revolutionary  Tribunal  by  abolishing  all  formal  proof  of 
guilt. 

"  Of  all  laws  ever  passed  in  the  world,  this,"  says  Lord 
Morley,  "  is  the  most  nakedly  iniquitous."  Prisoners  were 
henceforth  tried  in  batches  without  counsel  to  defend 
them,  and  were  deprived  even  of  the  privilege  of  calling 
witnesses  for  the  defence.  The  Tribunal  was,  however, 
undeniably  effective.  Within  six  weeks  the  number 
of  its  victims  exceeded  1,400 ;  but  the  end  was  now  in 
sight ;  the  tyranny  of  Robespierre  and  the  triumvirate 
had  become  intolerable.  Had  Robespierre  himself  pos- 
sessed an  atom  of  practical  ability  his  ascendency  might 
have  been  considerably  prolonged ;  but  of  decisive  action 
he  was  incapable. 

The  Re-  Thus  things  hurried  on  to  a  crisis.  No  party  and  no 
individual  knew  who  would  be  the  next  victims,  and 
all  determined  to  strike  at  the  arch-terrorist.  On  the 
9th  of  Thermidor  the  blow  was  struck  Robespierre, 


ENGLAND  AND  FRANCE  51 

St.  Couthon  and  St.  Just  were  arrested,  and  though  the 
Commune  of  Paris  stood  by  them  the  Convention  man- 
aged to  assert  itself,  and  Robespierre  and  his  comrades 
at  last  shared  the  fate  of  thousands  of  their  victims. 

Robespierre  is  a  curious  and  interesting  study :  he 
proclaimed  himself  to  be  the  champion  of  morality  and 
a  "  living  martyr  to  the  Republic,  at  once  the  victim  and 
the  enemy  of  crime  ".  It  was  a  pose,  but  an  unconscious 
one.  Fertile  in  phrases  and  a  genuine  sentimentalist, 
Robespierre  probably  deceived  himself  even  more  than 
he  deceived  others.  With  his  death  we  reach  a  turning- 
point  in  the  Revolution,  the  close  of  the  Terror  and  the  be- 
ginning of  the  reaction.  Why  France  endured  for  so  long 
(April,  17  93- July,  1794)  a  system  under  which  thousands l 
of  innocent  victims  were  sent  to  the  scaffold  in  the  name 
of  Liberty  remains  one  of  the  enigmas  of  history.  The 
Terror  was  the  work  of  a  contemptible  and  not  wholly 
compact  minority,  and  its  overthrow  was  welcomed  by 
the  vast  majority  of  the  citizens  of  France. 

"  Oui,  il  y  a  un  Dieu,"  said  a  Parisian  artisan,  as  he 
gazed  upon  the  prostrate  body  of  Robespierre.  The  senti- 
ment was  re-echoed  throughout  France. 

1  Tairie  puts  it  at  17,000,  but  this  is  probably  an  exaggeration.  It 
is  estimated  that  between  April,  1793,  and  July,  1794,  2,625  per- 
sons were  sentenced  to  death  by  the  Revolutionary  Tribunal  at 
Paris  alone. 


Reaction 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE    ADVENT   OF    NAPOLEON    BONAPARTE.      THE   EE AC- 
TION IN  FRANCE  (1794-1802) 

Constitutional  Government  is  a  chimera  at  the  conclusion  of  a 
Revolution  such  as  that  of  France.  It  is  not  under  shelter  of 
legal  authority  that  parties  whose  passions  have  been  so  violently 
excited  can  arrange  themselves  and  repose ;  a  more  vigorous  power 
is  required  to  restrain  them,  to  fuse  their  still  burning  elements, 
and  protect  them  against  foreign  violence.  That  power  is  the 
Empire  of  the  sword. — THIERS. 

The  ^  r  I  AHE  "  Revolution  of  Thermidor  "  marks  the  beginning 
A  of  reaction.  Nearly  all  parties  were  now  anxious 
to  put  an  end  to  the  Terror,  and  to  re-establish  a  settled 
Government.  The  Revolutionary  Tribunal  was  sus- 
pended ;  the  Law  of  the  22nd  Prairial  was  annulled ;  the 
suspects  were  gradually  released ;  the  agents  of  the  Terror 
were  brought  to  that  Justice  which  they  had  so  hideously 
burlesqued ;  the  decree  proscribing  the  priests  and  nobles 
was  revoked ;  the  seventy-three  excluded  Girondist  depu- 
ties were  recalled  to  the  Convention,  and,  in  December, 
1794,  the  Jacobin  Club  was  closed.  Finally,  with  a  laud- 
able anxiety  to  restore  a  healthy  tone  to  commerce  and 
finance,  the  Law  of  the  maximum  was  repealed,  and  the 
system  of  requisitions  for  the  supply  of  the  army  was 
gradually  abandoned  (December).  These  measures,  though 
eminently  wise  and  just,  served  for  the  moment  only  to 
intensify  the  financial  crisis.  By  the  end  of  1794  as- 

52 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE        53 

signats  (or  paper  money)  to  the  nominal  value  of  7,000 
million  francs  were  in  circulation,  and  within  twelve 
months  this  huge  amount  was  more  than  doubled.  The 
value  of  this  paper  currency  fell  with  corresponding 
rapidity.  In  December,  1794,  the  assignats  were  worth 
22  per  cent,  only  of  their  face  value  ;  in  May,  1795,  they 
had  fallen  to  7  per  cent.,  and  by  the  end  of  the  year 
to  1  per  cent.  With  the  fall  in  the  value  of  the  cur- 
rency prices  rose  to  starvation  height ;  an  assignat 
of  100  francs  would  scarcely  purchase  a  plate  of  soup, 
and  distress,  both  in  Paris  and  the  provinces,  became 
intense.  In  the  spring  of  1795  the  remnant  of  the 
Jacobin  party  rallied  sufficiently  to  make  political  capital 
out  of  distress  and  to  inflame  the  starving  populace  to 
a  couple  of  revolts  (12th  Germinal  and  1st  Prairial). 
But  after  several  days  of  street  fighting  these  insurrec- 
tions were  suppressed,  and  the  Convention  took  advantage 
of  its  victory  finally  to  extinguish  the  power  of  the 
Terrorists.  The  National  Guard  was  reorganised,  the 
populace  was  disarmed ;  sixty  deputies  of  the  "  Moun- 
tain "  or  Jacobin  party  were  proscribed,  and  many  of  the 
leading  agents  of  the  late  administration  were  guillotined 
or  exiled  to  Cayenne. 

The  triumph  of  the  Moderates  was  accentuated  by  the  French 
extraordinary  success  which  in  the  main  had  attended Vlctonea 
the  arms  of  France.     The  victory  of  the  allies  during  the 
spring  and  summer  of  1793  was  a  mere  flash  in  the  pan. 
Before  the  end  of  that  year  France,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
rapidly  regaining  the  ground  she  had  lost,  and  in  1794 
was  able  to  resume  the  offensive.     England  indeed  main- 
tained her  position  at  sea  and  inflicted  a  decisive  defeat 
upon  the  French  fleet  on  the  1st  of  June.     But  Howe's 
famous  victory  was  counter-balanced  by  that  of  Jourdan 


54  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

at  Fleurus  (26th  June) ;  the  English  and  Austrians  were 
driven  back  on  Holland,  the  Prussians  had  to  give  way 
on  the  middle  Rhine,  and  by  the  end  of  1794  Belgium 
was  once  more  in  the  hands  of  France.  "  Eight  pitched 
battles  won,  116  tjwns  and  230  forts  taken,  90,000 
prisoners  and  3,800  guns  captured."  Such  was  the 
French  record  for  1794.  From  Belgium  the  French  ad- 
vanced into  Holland,  and  early  in  1795  they  proclaimed 
there,  to  the  undisguised  satisfaction  of  the  inhabitants, 
the  Batavian  Republic.  As  a  consequence  England 
virtually  withdrew  from  all  part  in  the  continental 
struggle  and  concentrated  her  efforts  upon  the  maritime 
and  colonial  contest.  On  the  Italian  and  Spanish  frontiers 
French  arms  were  no  less  successful.  Political  forces 
were  also  working  in  their  favour,  and  the  European  coali- 
tion was  rapidly  going  to  pieces.  From  the  first  Prussia 
had  been  more  interested  in  the  development  of  events 
in  Poland  than  in  France.  In  conjunction  with  Russia 
she  had  effected  the  Second  Partition  of  Poland  in  1793, 
and  in  1795  the  two  Powers  admitted  Austria  to  a  share 
in  the  final  dismemberment  of  that  unhappy  country. 
Treaties  of  Jn  the  same  year  the  war  of  the  First  Coalition  came  to 
an  end.  The  Grand  Duke  of  Tuscany  made  peace  early 
in  1795,  and  during  the  summer  a  series  of  treaties  was 
concluded  at  Basle.  Prussia  (5th  April,  1795)  agreed  to 
surrender  her  provinces  to  the  west  of  the  Rhine,  and  for 
ten  years  took  no  further  part  in  the  war ;  France  granted 
peace,  on  Prussia's  intercession,  to  the  Northern  States  of 
the  Empire,  and  by  a  secret  Treaty  (5th  August)  agreed  to 
compensate  Prussia,  in  return  for  the  Rhine  frontier,  with 
territory  to  the  east  of  that  river.  Spain  purchased  peace 
by  the  cession  of  part  of  St.  Domingo,  and  England,  Austria 
and  Sardinia  were  thus  left  alone  to  confront  France. 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE        55 


Meanwhile,  encouraged  by  the  progress  of  the 
Jacobin  reaction,  the  Royalist  Emigres  attempted  to  re-  the  West 
inf  orce  the  efforts  of  the  Vendeans  in  the  West.  In  June, 
1795,  they  made  a  descent  upon  Quiberon  Bay,  but  their 
forces  were  routed  by  Hoche,  and  the  attempt  served 
only  to  demonstrate  the  military  incapacity  of  the  Emigres 
and  the  attachment  of  the  French  people  to  the  Republic. 
Before  the  end  of  the  year  Hoche  by  a  combination  of 
sternness  and  clemency  at  last  succeeded  in  bringing  the 
risings  in  La  Vendee  and  Brittany  to  an  end. 

Victorious  over  its  enemies  abroad  and  at  home,  and  The  Con- 
relieved  of  one  source  of  embarrassment  by  the  death  of  the  Year 
the  young  Louis  XVII.1  (8th  June,  1795),  the  Republic  now  m 
made  a  determined  effort  to  secure  for  itself  a  stable 
government.  The  effort  issued  in  the  establishment  of 
the  government  of  the  Directory.  A  brief  experience 
had  taught  France  the  practical  inconvenience  of  a  single- 
chamber  legislature.  Under  the  new  constitution,  there- 
fore, the  legislative  authority  was  vested  in  two  Councils  — 
the  Council  of  Cinq-Cent  and  the  Council  of  Ancients. 
The  former  had  the  sole  right  to  initiate  legislation. 
The  latter  possessed  only  the  right  of  veto.  One-third 
of  each  Council  was  to  retire  every  year,  though  it  was 
subsequently  decreed  that  of  the  first  Councils  two-thirds 
should  be  selected  from  the  members  of  the  outgoing 
Convention.  This  "  perpetuation  "  decree  was  passed 
partly  to  avoid  the  opposite  blunder  of  1791,  and  partly 
to  exclude  Royalists  from  the  new  Councils.  But  though 
not  indefensible  the  provision  was  taken  to  betray  a  lack 
of  confidence  in  the  electorate,  and  it  gave  the  new  con- 
stitution a  bad  start. 

Nominally  succeeded  his  father,  Louis  XVI.,  as  a  lad  of  eight 
in  1793. 


56     THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

The  executive  power  was  confided  to  a  Directory  of 
five  members,  selected  by  the  Council  of  Ancients  from  a 
list  of  ten  presented  by  the  Cinq-Cents.  One  Director 
was  to  retire  annually,  but  otherwise  the  Directors,  re- 
movable by  impeachment,  were  not  responsible  either  to 
the  legislature  or  to  the  people.  This,  in  fact,  was 
the  cardinal  defect  of  the  Constitution  of  the  Year  III. : 
neither  directly  nor  through  the  Legislature  could  the 
country  impress  its  will  upon  the  executive.  The 
supreme  importance  of  securing  harmonious  co-operation 
between  law-makers  and  executive  administrators  was  a 
lesson  which  Frenchmen  were  slow  to  learn.  But  nothing 
did  more  to  wreck  successive  constitutions  than  the 
neglect  of  this  truth.  The  Directorial  Constitution  was 
no  exception  to  the  rule. 

13th  Ven-  Its  first  peril  was,  however,  successfully  encountered  in 
demiaire  the  insurrection  of  13th  Vendemiaire  (5th  October,  1795). 
The  insurgents,  led  by  a  combination  of  reactionaries 
and  extreme  democrats,  were  inflamed  by  the  "  perpetua- 
tion decree  "  of  the  Convention.  The  latter  decided  on 
stern  measures  of  repression,  and  entrusted  the  execution 
of  them  to  Barras  and  a  young  Corsican  gunner  who  had 
been  favourably  mentioned  in  despatches  from  Toulon — 
Napoleon  Bonaparte.  Bonaparte  carried  out  his  orders 
with  characteristic  thoroughness.  The  "  whiff  of  grape- 
shot  "  dispersed  the  insurgents ;  and  the  Convention, 
triumphant  over  all  its  foes,  declared  its  long  session 
(since  September,  1792)  closed. 

Napoleon  The  first  batch  of  Directors  included,  besides  three 
nonentities,  Barras  and  Carnot,  but  the  appearance  of  the 
"  strong  man  "  upon  the  stage  of  Parisian  politics  opens 
a  new  act  in  the  drama  of  the  Revolution.  By  his  aid 
the  Convention  had  triumphed ;  on  his  strong  arm  the 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE         57 

Directory  was  to  lean  ;  in  him  the  Revolution  was  to  find 
both  consummation  and  contradiction.  For  Napoleon 
Bonaparte  was  at  once  the  embodiment  of  the  principles 
of  the  Revolution  and  the  representative  of  the  reaction 
against  them. 

Born  at  Ajaccio  in  Corsica  (1769)  Bonaparte  was  edu- 
cated at  the  military  schools  of  Brienne  and  Paris.  He 
appears  to  have  had  some  thoughts  of  entering  the  service 
of  the  English  East  India  Company,  where  "gunners 
were  better  appreciated  than  in  France,"  but  remaining 
in  Corsica  he  resisted  the  separatist  movement  in  the 
island,  and  when  the  Corsicans,  led  by  Paoli,  declared  their 
independence  of  France  (1793),  Bonaparte  took  refuge  in 
Marseilles.  In  France  he  posed  as  a  Jacobin,  attached 
himself  to  the  party  of  Robespierre,  and  in  August,  1793, 
found  himself  virtually  in  command  of  the  artillery  in 
the  force  raised  for  the  siege  of  Toulon.  In  that  siege 
he  greatly  distinguished  himself,  and  in  1794  he  was 
appointed  general  of  artillery  in  the  army  of  Italy. 
The  fall  of  Robespierre  (July,  1794)  endangered  for  the 
moment  the  position  he  had  won,  and  he  was  suspended 
from  his  command ;  but  his  talents  were  too  great  to  be 
ignored,  and  before  the  end  of  the  year  a  post  was  found 
for  him  at  the  war  office.  His  signal  service  to  the  Re- 
public in  the  insurrection  of  13th  Vendemiaire  was  re- 
warded by  his  appointment  to  the  command  of  the  army 
of  Italy.  He  had  been  employed  at  the  war  office  to 
draw  a  plan  for  an  Italian  campaign,  and  Carnot's  eagle 
eye  discerned  in  the  draftsman  the  soldier  best  fitted  to 
execute  his  own  plan.  That  his  appointment  to  this  im- 
portant command  coincided  with  his  marriage  to  Josephine 
Beauharnais  (March,  1796)  is  true  ;  but  it  was  due  less  to 
the  social  influence  which  he  then  for  the  first  time  enjoyed, 


58  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

than  to  the  recognition  of  sheer  military  capacity.     Before 
the  end  of  March  he  left  Paris  to  take  up  his  command. 

That  command  marks  the  real  beginning  of  Bonaparte's 
political  career,  and  a  turning-point  in  the  history  of  the 
war. 

The  Italian  At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  Italy  had  reached 
the  nadir  of  impotence  and  degradation.  For  centuries 
she  had  served  as  the  cockpit  of  contending  dynasties, 
and  had  suffered  the  domination  now  of  Habsburg  now 
of  Bourbon.  In  1796  Italy  was  divided  into  fifteen 
states.  The  Milanese  (Lombardy)  was  the  only  one 
actually  incorporated  into  a  foreign  Empire  (Austria),  but 
Tuscany  was  an  appanage  of  the  Austrian  House,  and 
several  of  the  smaller  Duchies  were  under  its  influence. 
One  Spanish  Bourbon  was  on  the  throne  of  the  Two 
Sicilies  and  another  was  Duke  of  Parma  and  Piacenza. 
Venice  and  Genoa  still  retained  their  republican  inde- 
pendence, but  without  any  of  their  ancient  vigour ;  while 
central  Italy  lay  benumbed  under  the  hand  of  the  Papacy. 
Piedmont,  ruled  by  the  King  of  Sardinia,  alone  among  the 
Italian  states  showed  any  sign  of  vigorous  political  life, 
and  even  Piedmont  failed  when  the  hour  of  trial  came. 

Such  was  the  Italy  into  which,  in  the  spring  of  1796, 
Bonaparte  marched,  proclaiming  himself  the  champion 
of  Italian  freedom  and  the  destined  restorer  of  Italian 
nationality. 

His  plan  of  campaign  against  Austria  involved  a  three- 
fold advance  on  Vienna.  Jourdan,  in  command  of  the 
army  which  had  lately  conquered  the  Netherlands,  was  to 
advance  into  Germany  by  the  valley  of  the  Main  ;  Moreau 
was  to  cross  the  Rhine  at  Strasburg  and  advance  by  the 
Danube ;  Napoleon  himself  was  to  attack  in  north  Italy 
and  take  the  Austrians  in  flank.  The  scheme  though 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE         59 

brilliant  in  conception  demanded  great  nicety  of  execu- 
tion, and,  except  where  Napoleon  himself  commanded,  it 
broke  down.  Jourdan  and  Moreau  found  themselves 
opposed  by  the  Archduke  Charles,  a  strategist  of  the 
first  order,  at  the  head  of  100,000  troops.  Jourdan 
crossed  the  Rhine  at  Cologne  and  at  Diisseldorf,  and 
penetrated  into  the  Palatinate,  but  defeated  by  the  Arch- 
duke at  Amberg  (24th  August)  and  Wiirzburg  (3rd 
September)  was  glad  to  regain  French  territory  without 
further  disaster.  Moreau  made  a  dash  into  Bavaria  and 
got  as  far  as  Munich,  but  the  defeat  of  his  colleague 
left  him  to  face  alone  the  army  of  the  victorious  Arch- 
duke. No  course  was  open  to  him  but  to  fall  back  on 
the  Rhine,  and  by  a  series  of  masterly  rear-guard  actions 
he  regained  Strasburg  in  December. 

Far  different  was  the  issue  of  the  Italian  campaign 
under  Napoleon.  His  first  business  was  to  drive  in  a 
wedge  between  the  Austrians  and  their  Sardinian  allies. 
This  done  he  compelled  the  King  of  Sardinia  to  sue  for 
an  armistice  before  the  campaign  was  a  fortnight  old. 
Peace  was  concluded  on  15th  May,  by  which  Sardinia 
ceded  Savoy  and  Nice  to  France  and  allowed  Bonaparte  to 
occupy  the  strong  fortresses  of  Tortona,  Valenza  and  Coni. 

Having  crushed  the  Piedmontese  Bonaparte  now  turned 
upon  the  Austrians,  forced  a  passage  over  the  bridge  of 
Lodi  (10th  May),  and  entered  Milan  on  the  16th.  All 
Lombardy,  with  the  exception  of  Mantua,  was  now  at  his 
feet.  Alarmed  by  the  brilliant  success  of  French  arms 
other  Italian  Powers  hastened  to  come  to  terms  with  the 
victorious  general.  The  Dukes  of  Parma  and  Modena 
concluded  armistices  with  the  French  in  May ;  the  Pope 
and  the  King  of  Naples  in  June.  By  the  definitive  Peace 
of  Tolentino  (19th  February,  1797)  the  Pope  was  compelled 


60  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

to  renounce  all  claim  to  Avignon  and  to  cede  Bologna  and 
Ferrara  to  France.  Meanwhile  Bonaparte  had  already 
begun  the  reorganisation  of  Italy.  Before  the  end  of 
1796  Austrian  Lombardy  was  erected  into  the  Trans- 
padane  Republic,  and  Bologna,  Ferrara,  Modena  and 
Reggio  combined  to  form  a  Cispadane  Republic. 

But  Mantua  was  still  untaken.  Incomparably  the 
most  important  strategical  point  in  North  Italy,  this 
great  fortress  resisted  all  the  efforts  of  Bonaparte  from 
June,  1796,  to  February,  1797.  Again  and  again  the 
Austrians  attempted  to  relieve  it,  but  Wurmser  was 
defeated  at  Brescia  and  at  Castiglione  in  August ;  Alvinzi 
was  routed  after  three  days'  fighting  at  Arcola  (15th- 19th 
November),  and  again  at  Rivoli  (14th  January),  and  on 
2nd  February  Mantua  surrendered.  Bonaparte  was  now 
free  to  advance  on  Vienna  :  but  in  April  preliminaries  of 
peace  were  signed  at  Leoben,  and  after  six  months  of 
negotiation  a  definitive  peace  was  concluded  between 
France  and  Austria  at  Campo-Formio  (17th  October,  1797). 

During  those  six  months  Bonaparte  had  not  been  idle. 
In  May  he  picked  a  quarrel  with  Venice,  and  having 
deposed  the  ruling  oligarchy,  in  the  sacred  name  of 
"  Liberty  "  he  occupied  the  city  itself,  and  the  Venetian 
islands  in  the  Greek  Archipelago  (Corfu,  Cephalonia,  etc.). 
In  June  he  reorganised  northern  and  central  Italy  into 
the  Cisalpine  Republic,  consisting  of  the  Transpadane  and 
Cispadane  Republics,  Austrian  Lombardy,  Romagna  and 
the  Legations,  to  which  were  subsequently  added  the 
Valtelline,  the  western  portion  of  Venetia  and  other  strips 
of  territory.  In  the  same  month  (4th  June)  Genoa  was 
converted  into  the  Ligurian  Republic  in  strict  dependence 
upon  France.  Nor  was  Bonaparte  neglectful  of  political 
developments  at  home.  The  Directory  had  not  succeeded 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE    61 

in  tranquillising  France ;  Pichegru,  strongly  suspected  of 
royalism,  had  become  President  of  the  Cinq-Cent,  and 
Barthelemy,  an  avowed  royalist,  had  succeeded  Letourneur 
as  Director.  The  Councils  themselves  had  by  the  new 
elections  been  strongly  reinforced  by  royalists,  and  Barras 
and  his  republican  colleagues  in  dire  alarm  sent  for  the 
conqueror  of  Italy.  Bonaparte  knew  how  to  wait ;  the 
pear  was  not  yet  ripe,  but  he  despatched  Augereau — a 
trusted  lieutenant — to  Paris,  and  by  Augereau's  help  the 
coup  d'ttat  of  18th  Fructidor  (4th  September,  1797)  was  18th 
effected.  Fifty-three  members  of  the  Councils,  including 
Pichegru,  were  arrested  and  sent  into  exile ;  Carnot  and 
Barthelemy,  threatened  with  a  like  fate,  managed  to 
escape,  and  the  authority  of  the  republican  Directors  was 
temporarily  restored.  What  is  the  real  significance  of 
Fructidor  ?  Ostensibly  a  defeat  for  the  royalists  it  put 
one  more  nail  into  the  coffin  of  the  Republic.  In  the  long 
run  Bonaparte  was  the  sole  gainer.  His  language  had 
already  begun  to  indicate  an  increasing  independence  of 
his  nominal  masters.  "  Do  you  suppose,"  he  wrote  in 
May,  1797,  "  that  I  triumph  in  Italy  for  the  glory  of  the 
lawyers  of  the  Directory,  a  Carnot  or  a  Barras  ?  Do  you 
suppose  that  I  mean  to  found  a  Republic?  What  an 
idea  ?  A  Republic  of  thirty  millions  of  people !  With 
our  morals,  our  vices !  How  is  such  a  thing  possible  ? 
The  nation  wants  a  chief,  a  chief  covered  with  glory,  not 
theories  of  government,  phrases,  ideological  essays  that 
the  French  do  not  understand.  They  want  some  play- 
things ;  that  will  be  enough ;  they  will  play  with  them 
and  let  themselves  be  led,  always  supposing  they  are 
cleverly  prevented  from  seeing  the  goal  towards  which 
they  are  moving."  His  tone  in  the  peace  negotiations 
with  Austria  corresponded  with  these  views.  He  was  the 


62  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Peace  of     independent  conqueror  not  the  servant  of  a  tottering  Re- 

Formio      public,  and  as  such  he  granted  to  the  Emperor  the  terms 

finally  embodied  in   the  Peace  of  Campo-Formio  (17th 

October,  1797).    By  this  exceedingly  important  treaty: — 

(1)  The  Austrian  Netherlands  were  definitely  ceded  to  France  ; 
(2)  the  Republic  of  Venice  was  annihilated  and  its  territories  parti- 
tioned :  Continental  Venetia  east  of  the  Adige,  Istria  and  Dalmatia 
were  annexed  to  Austria  ;  Venetia  east  of  the  Adige  to  the  Cisal- 
pine Republic ;  the  Ionian  islands  to  France ;  (3)  Austria  recog- 
nised the  Cisalpine  Republic  and  agreed  to  indemnify  the  Duke  of 
Modena  with  Breisgau. 

Such  was  the  public  treaty ;  the  secret  terms  were  even 
more  significant.  By  these  Austria  was  to  acquiesce  in 
the  attainment  of  the  Rhine  frontier  by  France ;  the  dis- 
possessed princes  were  to  be  indemnified  in  Germany,  and 
Austria  was  to  be  compensated  with  Salzburg  and  a  slice 
of  Bavaria. 

The  Treaty  of  Campo-Formio  was  at  once  a  triumph 
for  Bonaparte  and  a  real  satisfaction  to  Austria.  Bona- 
parte had  won  for  France  the  "scientific  frontier"  (the 
Rhine,  the  Alps  and  the  Pyrenees),  for  which  Richelieu 
and  Louis  XIV.  had  sighed  and  fought  in  vain  ;  he  had 
acquired  Savoy  and  Nice ;  he  had  established  the  domina- 
tion of  France  in  Italy  and  in  Holland;  and  he  had 
planted  the  French  flag  in  the  Ionian  isles.  Austria,  on 
the  other  hand,  gained  much  and  lost  little  that  she  cared 
to  keep.  Despite  defeat,  her  position  remained  unex- 
pectedly advantageous. 

That  Bonaparte  deliberately  spared  and  even  caressed 
Austria  at  Campo-Formio  there  can  be  no  doubt.  He 
was  already  flying  at  higher  game. 

The  acquisition  of  the  Ionian  isles  by  France  is  the 
key  to  Bonaparte's  policy.  They  were  a  stepping-stone 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE         63 

to  Egypt,  and  Egypt,  as  Bonaparte  believed,  was  the  key 
to  the  conflict  between  France  and  England.  "Really 
to  destroy  England,"  he  wrote  in  August,  1797,  "we  must 
make  ourselves  masters  of  Egypt."  What  were  his 
chances  of  success  ? 

The  French  conquest  of  Holland  in  1795  led  England,  Napoleon 
as  we  have  seen,  to  concentrate  her  efforts  on  the  mari-a^aparte 
time  and  colonial  struggle.  After  the  establishment  of  England 
the  Batavian  Republic  Holland  became  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  a  dependency  of  France.  England,  therefore, 
promptly  declared  war  upon  her,  and  as  a  result  many 
of  the  Dutch  colonies  fell  into  British  hands.  Cape 
Colony  was  occupied  in  1795  :  Malacca,  Ceylon  and  part 
of  the  West  Indies  were  conquered  in  the  same  year. 
Spain  similarly  threw  in  her  lot  with  France  and  with 
similar  results.  For  a  maritime  Power  to  enter  into 
alliance  at  this  juncture  with  France  was  merely  to  ex- 
pose itself  and  its  colonies  to  the  attack  of  the  British 
navy.  Thus  Spain's  declaration  of  war  was  immediately 
followed  by  the  loss  of  Trinidad  and  by  the  annihilation  of 
her  navy  at  Cape  St.  Vincent  (February,  1797).  Holland 
suffered  similarly  at  Camperdown  in  October.  St.  Vincent 
and  St.  Lucia,  taken  by  the  French  in  1795,  were  re- 
captured by  Abercromby  in  1796,  and  in  December  of  the 
same  year  Hoche  failed  in  his  attempted  descent  upon 
Ireland. 

But  though  England's  successes  at  sea  were  virtually 
unbroken,  the  outlook  for  her  in  1797  was  not  free  from 
anxiety.  Ireland  was  on  the  verge  of  rebellion;  there 
were  mutinies  in  the  fleet  and  no  little  discontent  at 
home;  a  financial  panic  compelled  the  suspension  of 
cash  payments,  and  Consols  fell  to  48.  Moreover,  on 
the  Continent  there  was  no  longer  a  soldier  in  arms 


64  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

against  the  French  Republic.  Pitt,  always  averse  to 
the  war,  was  now  more  than  ever  anxious  to  make  peace. 
Twice  in  1796  he  had  made  overtures  to  the  Directory, 
and  in  1797  negotiations  were  resumed  at  Lille.  Lord 
Malmesbury,  to  whom  they  were  entrusted,  was  sincerely 
anxious  for  peace,  but  his  efforts  to  obtain  it  were  vain, 
and  Pitt  no  sooner  realised  their  vanity  than  he  threw 
himself  with  vigour  into  the  task  of  forming  a  second 
coalition  against  France. 

Hardly  was  the  ink  dry  on  the  Treaty  of  Campo- 
Formio  before  it  became  clear  that  Bonaparte  regarded  it 
not  as  a  settlement  but  as  a  stepping-stone.  Dis- 
turbances in  Rome  led  to  the  occupation  of  the  City 
by  French  troops  (February,  1798).  The  advent  of  the 
French  was  soon  followed  by  the  establishment  of  the 
Roman  Republic  and  the  expulsion  o(f  the  Pope.  The 
Swiss  Federation  was  the  next  victim.  The  Swiss  were 
now  as  ever  anxious  to  avoid  being  involved  in  the 
continental  turmoil :  but  no  efforts  could  avail ;  early  in 
1798  Switzerland  was  conquered,  and  the  Helvetic  Re- 
public was  established  in  close  dependence  upon  France. 

TheEgyp-       Bat  Bonaparte  himself  had  bigger  things   on  hand. 

pedition  Soon  after  the  coup  d'ttat  of  Fructidor  he  was  appointed 
to  the  chief  command  of  the  "  army  of  England".  His 
immediate  objective  was  Egypt,  and  on  18th  May,  1798, 
he  set  sail  at  the  head  of  a  great  expedition  from  Toulon. 
Malta  was  occupied  without  resistance  from  the  Knights 
(10th  June) ;  Bonaparte  landed  his  troops  in  Egypt  (1st 
July) ;  took  Alexandria  (2nd  July) ;  fought  and  won  the 
battleof  the  Pyramids  (21st  July),  and  occupied  Cairo  on  the 
22nd.  Egypt  was  in  his  hands.  But  Nelson  and  the 
English  fleet  were  on  his  track,  and  on  1st  August  they  an- 
nihilated the  French  fleet  in  the  battle  of  the  Nile.  Nelson's 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE        65 

great  victory  rendered  Bonaparte's  position  in  Egypt  ex- 
ceedingly precarious.  Deprived  of  his  fleet,  cut  off  from 
his  base,  a  lesser  man  would  have  deemed  it  desperate.  On 
1st  September  Turkey,  encouraged  by  Nelson's  victory, 
declared  war  on  the  French  and  prepared  for  the  re- 
conquest  of  Egypt.  Bonaparte,  therefore,  determined 
to  take  the  offensive  in  Syria.  He  took  Jaffa  by  assault, 
laid  siege  to  Acre  (March,  1799)  and  inflicted  a  terrible 
defeat  upon  the  Turks  at  Mount  Tabor  (16th  April). 
Acre,  thanks  to  Sir  Sidney  Smith,  proved  impreg- 
nable, and  Bonaparte  decided  to  retreat  on  Egypt.  From 
Egypt  the  Turks  were  determined  to  dislodge  him.  On 
llth  July  a  second  Turkish  army  despatched  from 
Rhodes  disembarked  at  Aboukir,  only  to  be  annihilated  by 
the  French  and  driven  headlong  into  the  sea  on  25th  July. 
This  battle  of  Aboukir  (to  be  carefully  distinguished  from 
Nelson's  victory  in  Aboukir  Bay  twelve  months  earlier) 
established  Bonaparte's  supremacy  in  Egypt.  But  it 
was  a  barren  victory.  News  from  France  convinced  him 
that  the  moment  for  striking  the  effective  blow  in  French 
politics  had  come,  and  that  it  must  be  struck  in  Paris. 
On  25th  August,  precisely  a  month  after  the  victory  of 
Aboukir,  he  embarked  at  Alexandria,  leaving  the  com- 
mand in  Egypt  to  Kleber.  The  Mediterranean  was 
carefully  patrolled  by  the  English  fleet,  but  Bonaparte 
managed  to  evade  it,  landed  at  Frejus  on  9th  October, 
and  on  the  16th  reached  Paris.  On  9th  November  he 
carried  out  the  coup  d'dtat  of  18th  Brumaire,  and  by  a 
single  blow,  struck  at  precisely  the  right  moment,  made 
himself  master  of  France. 

During  Bonaparte's  absence  in  Egypt  events  had  moved  War  of  the 
rapidly  in  Europe.     In  the  winter  of  1798-99  a  fresh  coali-  coalition, 
tion  was   formed,  largely  through   the   efforts   of   Pitt,1798'1801 
5 


66  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODEEN  EUROPE 

against  France.  Great  Britain,  Russia  and  Austria  were 
the  chief  parties,  but  Turkey,  Naples  (the  Two  Sicilies) 
and  Portugal  also  adhered  to  it.  Prussia  alone  stood 
conspicuously  aloof.  The  war  opened  in  Southern  Italy 
where  Ferdinand  of  Naples  overthrew  the  recent  Roman 
Republic  and  invited  the  Pope  to  return  to  the  Vatican. 
But  his  triumph  was  brief.  The  Directory  marched  an 
army  into  Italy.  Charles  Emmanuel  IV.  of  Sardinia 
was  expelled  from  Turin  and  compelled  to  take  refuge  in 
Sardinia;  Ferdinand  of  Naples  was  driven  to  Palermo; 
the  Roman  Republic  was  re-established,  and  Southern 
Italy  was  organised  as  the  Parthenopean  Republic  (Janu- 
ary, 1799). 

Campaign  But  the  campaign  of  1799  was  in  the  main  unfortunate 
for  France,  though  Massena's  grip  on  Switzerland  pre- 
vented the  allies  from  turning  their  victories  in  the  field 
to  much  account.  Their  plan  was  to  attack  France  (i)  by 
way  of  the  upper  Rhine  and  (ii)  in  North  Italy.  On  the 
upper  Rhine  the  Archduke  Charles  was  completely 
victorious.  He  defeated  Jourdan  at  Stockach  (north  of 
Lake  Constance,  25th  March,  1799) ;  drove  Massena  back  in 
Switzerland,  occupied  Zurich,  and  took  Manheim  (18th 
September).  Not  less  decisive  were  the  victories  of  the 
Austro-Russian  forces  in  North  Italy.  Kray's  victory  on 
the  Adige  (Magnano,  5th  April),  drove  the  French  back 
on  Milan,  and  SuvarofFs  brilliant  campaign  (April-June) 
completed  their  discomfiture.  After  the  great  battle  of 
Trebbia  (17th-19th  June)  the  French  power  in  Italy  seemed 
to  be  annihilated.  The  Roman,  Parthenopean  and  Cisal- 
pine Republics  were  overthrown  ;  Genoa  alone  was  held  by 
France.  But  despite  reverses  in  the  field  France  held  the 
key  of  the  strategical  position,  and  both  in  a  military  and 
a  political  sense  the  coalition  was  a  rope  of  sand.  Suva- 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE        67 

roff,  owing  to  his  own  insolence  and  Austrian  jealousy,  had 
to  retire  over  the  S.  Gothard.  While  he  was  still  in  the 
Pass  Masseiia  inflicted  a  crushing  defeat  on  the  Russians 
under  Korsakoff  at  Zurich  (26th  September) ;  the  fruits  of 
SuvarofFs  great  campaign  were  lost,  and  Russia  with- 
drew in  dudgeon  from  the  war.  A  Russo-British  descent 
upon  Holland  (August-September,  1799)  had  served  little 
purpose  except  to  demonstrate  afresh  the  incapacity  of 
the  Duke  of  York. 

The  campaign  of  1800  opened  under  very  different  con-  Campaign 
ditions.     The  futile  Directory  had  gone,  and  the  resources  anFpeace 
of  France  were  concentrated  under  a  single  dominating  Lfun£viue 
intellect.     The  result  was  seen  at  once.     Austria  was  at-  (isoi) 
tacked  vigorously  by  the  Danube  and  in  North  Italy. 
Bonaparte's  campaign  in  Italy  was  crowned  by  the  great 
victory  of  Marengo  (14th  June)  and  Moreau's  march  into 
the  heart  of   South  Germany  by  that  of   Hohenlinden 
(3rd  December).     Austria  was  once  more  at  the  mercy  of 
Bonaparte,  and  in  February,  1801,  was  compelled  to  sign 
the  Peace  of  Luneville. 

By  that  Treaty  the  concessions  already  made  at  Campo-Formio 
were  confirmed :  the  Emperor  Francis  was  further  compelled  to 
accept  the  Adige  as  his  boundary  in  North  Italy ;  to  surrender 
Tuscany  to  the  son  of  the  Bourbon  Duke  of  Parma,  an  arrangement 
preliminary  to  the  latter's  elevation  to  the  kingdom  of  Etruria : 
to  recognise  the  Cisalpine,  the  Ligurian,  the  Helvetic  and  the 
Batavian  Republics,  and  to  acknowledge  the  right  of  France  to 
the  Rhine  frontier. 

Bonaparte  subsequently  concluded  with  Naples  a  peace 
by  which  King  Ferdinand  agreed  to  exclude  British  and 
Turkish  vessels  from  his  harbours,  and  to  surrender  to 
France  the  Stato  del  Presidii  (i.e.,  the  maritime  districts 
of  Tuscany)  for  the  augmentation  of  a  future  kingdom 


68  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

of  Etruria.  By  a  treaty  with  Spain  the  latter  ceded 
Lousiana  to  France,  from  whom  it  was  subsequently 
purchased  (1803)  by  the  United  States. 

Once  more  Great  Britain  stood  alone  confronting 
France.  Bonaparte  had  had  little  difficulty  in  detaching 
the  Czar  Paul  of  Russia  from  the  coalition.  More  than 
that,  the  Czar,  instigated  by  France,  had  revived  against 
England  the  Armed  Neutrality  (December,  1800),  con- 
sisting of  Russia,  Prussia,  Sweden  and  Denmark.  But 
this  sinister  combination  was  quickly  broken  up  first  by 
Nelson's  brilliant  victory  at  Copenhagen  (2nd  April, 
1801),  and,  secondly,  by  the  assassination  of  the  Czar 
Paul  (March,  1801).  Paul's  successor  Alexander  I.  was  a 
man  of  a  different  mould  and  temper.  Meanwhile  Great 
Britain  was  determined  to  allow  no  remnant  of  Bonaparte's 
authority  to  remain  in  Egypt.  The  victory  of  Sir  Ralph 
Abercromby  at  Alexandria  (March,  1801)  practically  de- 
cided the  matter:  in  September  the  French  agreed  to 
evacuate  Egypt,  which  was  forthwith  restored  to  the 
Porte.  There  was  no  longer  any  immediate  obstacle  in 
the  way  of  the  conclusion  of  peace,  and  on  25th  March, 
1802,  a  treaty  was  signed  at  Amiens  between  England 
on  the  one  side,  and  France,  Spain  and  the  Batavian 
Republic  on  the  other. 

France  agreed  to  evacuate  the  Papal  States  and  Naples,  to  restore 
Egypt  to  the  Porte  and  to  acknowledge  the  independence  of  the 
Ionian  islands.  Great  Britain,  on  the  other  hand,  restored  to  France 
and  her  allies  all  the  conquests  made  during  the  war,  except  Ceylon 
(captured  from  Holland  in  1795)  and  Trinidad  (taken  from  Spain  in 
1797) ;  she  agreed  that  Malta  should  be  restored  to  the  Knights  of 
St.  John,  and  tacitly  accepted  the  continental  settlement  as  denned 
at  Luneville. 

The  Treaty  of  Amiens,  the  only  peace  made  between 


THE  ADVENT  OF  NAPOLEON  BONAPARTE    69 

Great  Britain  and  France  during  the  long  series  of  Re- 
volutionary and  Napoleonic  wars,  proved  to  be  a  hollow 
truce.  But  Pitt  was  no  longer  at  the  helm  in  England, 
and  Bonaparte  desired  a  breathing  space  in  which  to  con- 
solidate his  power  in  France. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE 

ENGLAND  AND  NAPOLEON 

We  have  done  with  the  romance  of  the  Revolution  ;  we  must 
now  commence  its  history. — NAPOLEON. 

Steps  A  T  peace  not  only  with  Europe  but  with  England 

^*-  Bonaparte  had  now  an  opportunity  to  establish  his 
position  in  France.  He  did  not  neglect  it.  The  way  had 
been  cleared  by  the  coup  d'dtat  of  the  18th  Brumaire. 
During  the  absence  of  Bonaparte  in  Egypt,  the  unpopu- 
larity of  the  Directory  had  become  more  and  more  pro- 
found. It  began  to  be  whispered  that  the  Directors, 
conscious  of  their  weakness  and  jealous  of  the  reputation 
of  the  successful  soldier,  had  sent  Bonaparte  to  Egypt  to 
get  rid  of  him.  His  reappearance  in  France  was  timed 
with  perfect  precision.  He  found  everything  ready  for 
the  step  which  he  had  long  foreseen.  On  the  15th 
Brumaire  he  came  to  an  understanding  with  the  Abbe 
Sieyes,  one  of  the  Directors,  and  three  days  later  the 
coup  d'ttat  was  effected.  The  Directory  was  dissolved  ; 
the  Council  of  the  Cinq-Cents  was  driven  out  at  the 
point  of  the  bayonet;  that  of  the  Ancients  acquiesced, 
and  executive  power  was  provisionally  conferred  upon 
Sieyes,  Roger  Ducos  and  Bonaparte.  Thus  was  accom- 
plished the  destruction  at  once  of  the  Directory  and  of 

70 


THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE  71 

the  Republic.  Few  Frenchmen  regretted  them ;  the 
coup  d'ttat  of  Brumaire  was  almost  universally  approved. 
Royalists  and  reactionaries,  moderates  and  republicans 
all  saw  in  the  overthrow  of  the  Directory  the  possibility 
of  the  opening  of  a  new  era  satisfactory  to  their  several 
interests,  hopeful  for  their  divergent  aims.  The  royalists 
regarded  it  as  a  step  towards  the  restoration  of  the 
Bourbons ;  the  moderate  republicans  fondly  imagined  that 
it  might  establish  "  Liberty  " — so  frequently  proclaimed 
in  word,  so  constantly  denied  in  fact ;  the  masses  saw  in 
it — with  greater  insight  — the  triumph  of  the  strong  man 
who  would  restore  order  in  France.  Many  hopes  were 
shattered  in  the  months  that  followed;  the  harvest  of 
Brumaire  was  reaped  exclusively  by  Bonaparte.  Thus 
was  the  prediction  of  Burke  literally  and  remarkably 
fulfilled.  The  popular  general  had  arrived  who  under- 
stood "the  art  of  conciliating  the  soldiery,"  and  possessed 
"the  true  spirit  of  command,"  and  who  knew  how  to 
draw  "the  eyes  of  all  men  upon  himself". 

The  provisional  Government  lasted  only  until  the  13th  The  Consu- 
of  December.     On  that  day  the  new  Constitution  of  the  stitution 
Year  VIII.  was  promulgated.     Drafted  by  the  prince  of 
constitution-mongers,  the  Abbe  Sieyes,  it  seemed  the  most 
fantastic  scheme   ever   evolved   out  of   the   brain    of   a 
doctrinaire.     But  perhaps  there  was  method  in  its  mad- 
ness. 

The  scheme,  despite  lip  homage  to  democratic  ideas, 
virtually  extinguished  popular  representation.  The  legis- 
lature was  to  consist  of  three  bodies :  (i)  a  Senate  of  80 
members,  nominated  for  life,  and  charged  with  the  duty 
of  selecting  (from  a  list  of  5,000  sent  up  by  the  depart- 
ments) the  members  of  the  two  other  bodies,  and  of 
vetoing  any  "  unconstitutional "  measures  passed  by  them ; 


72  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

(ii)  a  Tribunate  of  100  members,  which  could  discuss  laws, 
but  could  not  vote  on  them ;  and  (iii)  a  Corps  Ltyislatif, 
which  could  vote  upon  laws  without  debate.  The  execu- 
tive was  vested  in  a  Grand  Elector  and  two  Consuls,  and  a 
Council  of  State,  nominated  by  the  former,  the  principal 
function  of  the  Council  being  to  prepare  laws  to  be  dis- 
cussed by  the  Tribunate,  and  voted  on  by  the  Corps 
LSgislatif.  The  Grand  Elector  having  nominated  the 
Consuls  was  to  hold  a  mysterious  position  without  re- 
sponsibility or  real  power.  Such  was  the  "  phantom  " 
constitution  of  the  Abbe  Sieyes,  the  culminating  absurdity 
of  the  constitutional  experiments  attempted  during  the 
last  ten  years  in  France.  Napoleon l  turned  it  inside  out. 
The  legislature  was  "  impotent  for  mischief,"  and  might 
be  neglected  for  the  moment,  but  he  dealt  drastically  with 
the  phantom  Grand  Elector.  Sieyes,  as  Mr.  Fyffe  says, 
"  might  apportion  the  act  of  deliberation  among  debating 
societies  and  dumb  juries  to  the  full  extent  of  his  own 
ingenuity ;  but  the  moment  that  he  applied  his  disinte- 
grating method  to  the  executive,  Bonaparte  swept  away 
the  flimsy  reasoner,  and  set  in  the  midst  of  his  edifice  of 
shadows  the  reality  of  an  absolute  personal  rule  ".  The 
Grand  Elector  was  transformed  into  a  First  Consul  with 
powers  which  rendered  him  master  of  France.  To  him 
was  to  belong  the  right  of  nominating  all  the  chief  officials 
who  were  to  be  responsible  solely  to  him ;  of  initiating 
legislation,  and  of  nominating  the  members  of  the  Senate. 
In  1802  Napoleon  was  confirmed  in  the  Consulate  for  life, 
The  with  power  to  nominate  a  successor,  and  in  1804  he  ac- 

I804ire'  cepted,  or  rather  assumed,  the  Imperial  Crown.  Though 
the  way  had  been  long  prepared,  two  reasons  may  have 
precipitated  the  final  transformation  of  the  Consulate  into 

1  After  he  becomes  Ruler  of  France  I  write  of  him  as  Napoleon 
instead  of  Bonaparte. 


THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE  73 

an  hereditary  Empire  :  the  renewal  of  war  with  England 
and  the  detection  of  a  conspiracy  against  the  First  Con- 
sul. Of  this  conspiracy,  as  of  the  Popish  Plot  of  1678,  it 
may  be  said  : — 

The  wished  occasion  of  the  Plot  he  takes, 
Some  circumstances  finds,  but  more  he  makes.1 
The  prime  movers  in  the  plot  were  Georges  Cadoudal,  a 
Breton  zealot,  and  the  republican  generals  Pichegru  and 
Moreau ;  the  English  Government  was  at  least  privy  to 
it.  Napoleon,  thanks  to  Fouche  and  the  French  police, 
had  all  the  threads  of  the  conspiracy  in  his  hands  from 
the  first;  some  were  actually  spun  by  him,  but  he 
dexterously  waited  until  the  arrangements  were  complete 
and  the  leaders  within  his  grasp.  His  patience  and 
dexterity  were  amply  rewarded.  Pichegru  and  Moreau 
were  suddenly  arrested  with  other  leading  conspirators 
in  Paris.  Pichegru  died,  probably  by  a  violent  death, 
in  prison ;  Moreau  suffered  two  years'  imprisonment  and 
then  went  into  exile  in  America.  But  it  was  desirable 
that  some  member  of  the  Bourbon  house  should  be  in- 
volved in  the  conspiracy.  The  Count  of  Artois  could  not 
be  enticed  from  his  retirement  in  England ;  it  was  deter- 
mined, therefore,  to  make  the  Due  d'Enghien  the  victim. 
This  young  Bourbon  prince  was  living  quietly  in  Baden, 
when  he  was  suddenly  seized  by  French  troops,  marched 
off  to  Vincennes,  and  after  the  mockery  of  a  court- 
martial  was  shot.  His  innocence  was  subsequently  ad- 
mitted by  Napoleon  with  cynical  frankness.  "  I  had  to 
choose  between  continuous  persecution  and  one  decisive 
blow,  and  my  decision  was  not  doubtful.  I  have  for  ever 
silenced  both  royalists  and  Jacobins.  Only  the  republi- 
cans remain — mere  dreamers  who  think  that  a  Republic 
can  be  made  out  of  an  old  monarchy."  The  dreamers, 
1  Dryden  :  Absolom  and  Achitophel. 


74  THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

he  believed,  were  few  and  unimportant.  The  gorgeous 
ceremonial  in  the  Cathedral  of  Notre  Dame,  and  the 
acclamations  which  hailed  the  coronation  of  the  new 
Charlemagne,  appeared  to  justify  his  belief. 

Reorganis-  Meanwhile  the  new  Dictator  had  already  entered  upon 
French  the  stupendous  task  of  reorganising  the  institutions  of 
thunder  France  and  of  building  up  afresh  the  fabric  of  social 

Napoleon     order. 

In  this  work  Napoleon  showed  himself  at  once  the 
heir  of  the  Revolution,  and  the  product  of  the  reaction 
against  it.  Of  "Liberty"  he  retained  nothing  but  the 
husk ;  but  virtual  autocracy  was  combined  with  a  large 
measure  of  social  and  fiscal  "equality".  The  Constitu- 
tion of  the  Year  VIII.  was  further  emasculated  (notably  by 
the  modification  and  ultimate  suppression  of  the  Tribun- 
ate) until  all  power  was  concentrated  in  the  hands  of 
Napoleon.  As  with  Central  so  also  with  Local  institu- 
tions. The  elective  system  established  in  1790  had  issued 
in  hopeless  chaos.  Local  government,  therefore,  was  re- 
organised on  centralised  and  autocratic  lines  ;  the  elected 
Councils  were  reduced  to  impotence ;  the  Departments 
were  placed  under  prefects,  the  "  Arrondisements  "  under 
sub-prefects,  and  the  Communes  under  mayors — in  each 
case  appointed  by,  and  responsible  to,  the  central  govern- 
ment. Similarly,  the  levying  of  taxation  was  taken  out 
of  the  hands  of  local  bodies  and  vested  in  those  of 
controllers  appointed  from  Paris.  The  exchequer  and 
the  taxpayer  alike  benefited.  The  peasant  paid  less 
and  the  Government  got  more.  The  establishment  of 
the  Bank  of  France  (1800)  further  tended  to  restore 
financial  confidence.  Social  confidence  was  restored  by 
the  repeal  of  the  cruel  Law  of  Hostages,  and  of  almost 
all  Laws  and  Decrees  against  the  emigrant  nobility ; 
ecclesiastical  tranquillity  by  the  Concordat  (1801).  Ever 


THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIKE  75 

since  1790  the  Church  in  France  had  been  rent  in 
twain  by  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy.  This 
schism  was  at  last  healed,  and  with  the  goodwill  of 
the  Papacy  the  Church  took  its  place  in  the  ordered 
autocracy  of  Napoleon.  The  Pope  undertook  to  secure 
the  resignation  of  all  the  bishops ;  the  vacant  sees  were 
then  filled  impartially  from  "  Constitutionals  "  and  "  Non- 
jurors  " ;  the  State  was  to  nominate,  the  Pope  to  in- 
stitute ;  the  bishops  in  their  turn  were  to  renominate  and 
reinstate  the  cur6s ;  the  sales  of  Church  property  were 
confirmed,  and  the  clergy  became  the  salaried  officials 
of  the  State.  Such  was  the  famous  Concordat  of  1801. 
As  with  the  Church,  so  with  education.  Both  were  to 
subserve  the  work  of  social  and  political  reconstruction. 
"  So  long,"  said  Napoleon,  "  as  people  are  not  taught  from 
childhood  whether  they  are  to  be  republicans  or  monar- 
chists, Catholics  or  free-thinkers,  the  State  will  not  form 
a  nation ;  it  will  rest  on  vague  bases  and  be  constantly 
subject  to  change  and  disorder."  The  educational  system 
was  reorganised  in  consonance  with  this  fundamental 
conception.  A  single  "  University  of  France  "  was  set  up 
under  officials  appointed  by  Napoleon,  and  the  University 
in  its  turn  was  to  control  the  whole  educational  machinery 
higher,  secondary,  technical  and  elementary.  The  Press 
was  brought  under  similar  control ;  a  strict  censorship 
was  established,  and  recalcitrant  journals  were  suppressed. 
The  Judiciary  was  rendered  hardly  less  dependent  upon 
the  will  of  the  executive.  A  small  committee  of  experts 
had  been  appointed  in  1793  to  codify  the  law,  and  the 
results  of  their  labours,  carried  through  under  the  direct 
supervision  of  Napoleon,  still  survive  in  the  famous  Code 
Napoleon  (1807).  Much  of  the  law  of  Continental  Europe 
is  based  upon  this  code  to-day.  Thus  did  France  exchange 


76  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

liberty  for  efficiency.1  With  "  equality."  Napoleon  had  less 
quarrel.  The  institution  of  the  Legion  of  Honour  (1802) 
proved  that  he  was  quick  to  realise  that  French  de- 
mocracy has  little  affection  for  an  undecorated  equality ; 
but  "  equality  of  opportunity "  is  the  best  guarantee  of 
efficiency,  and  this  principle  was  rigidly  respected  by 
Napoleon. 

Rfewwal  ^-n  the  midst  of  all  this  activity  at  home,  Napoleon 
again  became  involved  in  war.  The  truce  with  England 
secured  by  the  Treaty  of  Amiens  proved  to  be  of  short 
duration.  Napoleon  complained  that  the  British  Govern- 
ment declined  to  evacuate  Malta.  England  complained 
that  Napoleon's  aggressions  in  time  of  peace  were  hardly 
less  numerous  and  less  lucrative  than  in  time  of  war. 
Piedmont  had  been  annexed  to  France ;  Napoleon  himself 
had  become  President  of  the  Italian  Republic  in  1802  and 
"mediator"  of  Switzerland  in  1803;  the  Batavian  and 
the  Ligurian  Republics  had  been  virtually  incorporated 
in  France.  The  English  newspapers  attacked  Napoleon, 
and  the  Moniteur  published  an  official  report  of  Colonel 
Sebastiani's  mission  in  Egypt,  which  gave  great  offence 
to  the  English  Government.  The  latter  consequently 
demanded  (i)  that  France  should  evacuate  Holland  and 
Switzerland ;  (ii)  that  England  should  retain  Malta  for  at 
least  ten  years ;  and  (iii)  should  acquire  Lampedusa — an 
island  off  the  coast  of  Tunis.  The  demands,  though  not 
unreasonable  in  view  of  Napoleon's  conduct,  were  such 

1  On  this,  cf.  Lord  Acton,  who  enforces  the  great  truth  proclaimed 
by  De  Tocqueville  that  "  the  French  Revolution  far  from  reversing 
the  political  spirit  of  the  old  State,  only  carried  out  the  same  prin- 
ciples with  intenser  energy.  The  State  which  was  absolute  before 
became  still  more  absolute,  and  the  organs  of  the  popular  will  be- 
came more  efficient  agents  for  the  exercise  of  arbitrary  power". 
(Historical  Essays  and  Studies,  p.  182.) 


THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE  77 

as  could  not  be  accepted,  and,  on  the  18th  May,  1803, 
England  declared  war. 

From  1803-5  the  war  was  devoid  of  serious  incidents. 
England  struck  at  the  West  Indies,  capturing  Tobago, 
St.  Lucia  and  Guiana  (from  the  Dutch)  in  1803,  while 
Napoleon,  in  flagrant  violation  of  the  Treaty  of  Basle, 
occupied  Hanover  and  Naples.  Of  all  the  Powers  Prussia 
was  most  nearly  touched,  both  in  honour  and  material 
interests,  by  the  occupation  of  Hanover;  but  Prussia, 
under  Frederick  William  III.  and  Haugwitz,  was  bent 
upon  the  maintenance  of  neutrality  and  offered  no  protest. 
Even  the  closing  of  the  Elbe  and  the  Weser  to  English 
ships — a  notable  anticipation  of  the  Continental  system — 
failed  to  rouse  North  Germany.  Austria  and  Russia,  how- 
ever, were  becoming  restless.  The  treacherous  murder 
of  the  Due  d'Enghien;  Napoleon's  assumption  of  the 
Imperial  Crown  (December,  1804),  and  most  of  all,  per- 
haps, his  assumption  of  the  Crown  of  Italy  (May,  1805), 
roused  the  hostility  of  the  Czar  and  the  Emperor.  Hence 
Pitt,  who  had  returned  to  power  in  April,  1804,  was  able 
in  1805  to  form  the  Third  Coalition. 

In  this,  England  and  Russia  were  joined  by  Austria  and  The  Third 
Gustavus  IV.  of  Sweden.      The  avowed  objects  of  the°c 
allies  were  to  drive  France  out  of  Italy,  Hanover,  Holland 
and  Switzerland;    to  restore  Piedmont  to  the  King  of 
Sardinia ;  Naples  to  its  Bourbon  king ;  and,  to  unite  Hol- 
land and  Belgium  under  the  House  of  Orange  as  a  barrier 
against  France.      Prussia  still  adhered  to  her  policy  of 
neutrality ;  Bavaria,  Baden  and  Wurtemberg  were  on  the 
side  of  France. 

The  main  interest  of  the  campaign  of  1805  centred  in  The 
the  attempt  of  Napoleon  to  achieve  the  supreme  object 
his  military  ambition — the  invasion  of  England.     To  this 


78  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

end  he  mobilised  a  great  army  at  Boulogne,  and  con- 
structed a  flotilla  of  flat-bottomed  boats  to  transport  it 
across  the  Channel.  But  to  the  success  of  his  scheme  one 
condition  was  essential :  he  must  have  at  least  temporary 
command  of  the  Channel.  This  was  to  be  obtained  by  a 
concentration  of  the  French  fleets  then  in  the  harbours 
of  Brest,  Rochefort  and  Toulon.  The  naval  scheme  was 
complicated,  and  had  the  fatal  weakness  of  being  planned 
not  by  a  sailor,  but  by  a  soldier  who  assumed  the  same 
precision  of  movement  in  fleets  as  in  armies.  Neverthe- 
less, it  was  only  just  less  successful  than  ingenious.  The 
English  disposition  was  as  follows  :  the  Toulon  fleet  under 
Villeneuve  was  watched  by  Nelson;  that  of  Rochefort 
under  Missiessy  by  Collingwood ;  that  of  Brest  under 
Gantheaume  by  Cornwallis.  Villeneuve  was  to  slip  out 
of  Toulon,  pick  up  some  Spanish  ships  at  Cadiz,  and  draw 
Nelson  after  him  to  the  West  Indies ;  Missiessy,  having 
slipped  out  of  Rochefort,  was  to  join  Villeneuve  at 
Martinique ;  and  Gantheaume,  having  eluded  Cornwallis, 
was  to  make  all  speed  across  the  Atlantic  and  effect  a  junc- 
tion with  the  Toulon  and  Rochefort  fleets  at  Martinique. 
The  combined  squadron  was  then  to  make  all  sail  for 
Europe  and  appear  off  Boulogne  between  10th  June  and 
10th  July. 

Villeneuve  successfully  eluded  Nelson,  and  with  the 
fleets  of  Toulon  and  Cadiz  reached  Martinique  on 
14th  May,  1805.1  Missiessy,  who  had  reached  Martinique 
in  February,  was  by  that  time  on  his  way  back  to 
Europe  (Rochefort,  20th  May).  Nelson,  despite  a  false 
impression  that  Egypt  was  Villeneuve's  objective,  was 
soon  on  his  heels,  and  got  to  Barbadoes  on  4th  June. 
Villeneuve,  however,  again  eluded  him  in  the  West  Indies, 

1  See  map,  p.  101. 


THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE  79 

turned  and  made  for  Europe.  Nelson  learnt  the  news  at 
Trinidad  (12th  June) ;  at  once  realised  the  game,  and  des- 
patched a  swift  brig — the  Curieux — to  warn  the  Admir- 
alty at  home.  The  Admiralty  got  the  news  on  8th  July ; 
reinforced  Cornwallis  off  Brest,  and  ordered  Sir  Robert 
Calder  to  intercept  Villeneuve  offCape  Finisterre.  Calder 
engaged  Villeneuve  off  Cape  Finisterre  on  the  22nd  of 
July.  The  action  itself  was  indecisive,  but  Villeneuve 
failed  to  push  on  to  Brest,  retired  to  refit  at  Vigo,  then 
slipped  into  Corunna,  and  on  15th  August  decided  to 
make  for  Cadiz.  Calder's  action  off  Finisterre  ruined 
Napoleon's  plan  for  the  invasion  of  England.  Nelson 
meanwhile  had  got  back  to  Europe  on  18th  July,  and 
formed  his  junction  with  Cornwallis,  off  Brest,  a  month 
later  (15th  August).  On  1 9th  October  Villeneuve,  in  obedi- 
ence to  Napoleon's  order  to  bring  the  fleet  round  to  Toulon, 
crept  out  of  Cadiz,  and  on  21st  October  Nelson,  who  had 
joined  Collingwood  off  Cadiz  on  28th  September,  inflicted 
a  crushing  defeat  upon  the  combined  fleets  of  France  and 
Spain  at  Trafalgar.  The  results  of  Nelson's  great  victory 
cannot  be  exaggerated :  not  only  did  it  destroy  the  French 
and  Spanish  fleets ;  not  only  did  it  establish  the  naval 
ascendancy  of  England;  but  it  compelled  Napoleon  to 
adopt  a  policy  which  ultimately  proved  his  ruin.  With 
England  indisputably  supreme  at  sea  Napoleon  could 
strike  at  her  only  with  economic  weapons.  Thus  the 
"  Continental  system "  was  the  last  desperate  plunge  of 
a  gambler  on  the  brink  of  ruin. 

But  no  one  could  have  anticipated  such  results  in  1805.  The  Cam. 
The  year  closed  in  gloom  for  England,  in  triumph  f or 
Napoleon.  The  failure  of  Villeneuve  to  reach  Brest, 
the  prompt  return  of  Nelson,  convinced  Napoleon  that 
invasion  was  impossible.  With  extraordinary  rapidity 
his  plan  was  changed :  by  26th  August  the  Boulogne 


80  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

army  was  on  the  march  for  the  upper  Rhine,  and  on  6th 
October  it  reached  the  Danube.  The  Austrian  General 
Mack  found  himself  surrounded  at  Ulm  before  he 
knew  that  Napoleon  had  left  Boulogne,  and  on  20th 
October  was  compelled  to  capitulate.  The  road  to  Vienna 
was  now  open;  on  13th  November  the  Austrian  capital 
was  occupied  by  Murat,  and  on  2nd  December  Napoleon 
himself  inflicted  a  terrible  defeat  upon  the  Czar  and  the 
Emperor  Francis  at  Austerlitz  in  Moravia.  Austerlitz 
smashed  the  Third  Coalition,  and  Prussia,  just  on  the  point 
of  tardy  intervention,  was  compelled  to  accept  from 
Napoleon  the  humiliating  Treaty  of  Schonbrunn  (15th 
December). 

By  this  Treaty  Prussia  was  compelled  to  accept  Hanover  from 
Napoleon  and  to  exclude  English  ships  from  her  harbours. 

Treaty  of  Even  more  disastrous,  though  less  humiliating,  were  the 
Pressburg  terms  imposed  upon  Austria  in  the  Treaty  of  Pressburg 
(26th  December,  1805).  Hitherto  Austria  had  been 
leniently  treated ;  but  Napoleon  now  made  up  his  mind 
that  the  power  which  had  formed  the  backbone  of  three 
Continental  Coalitions  must  be  crushed. 

By  the  Treaty  of  Pressburg  Austria  resigned  Venetia  to  the 
kingdom  of  Italy  and  recognised  Napoleon  as  its  king  ;  to  Bavaria, 
raised  by  Napoleon  to  the  dignity  of  a  kingdom,  she  ceded  the 
whole  of  the  Tyrol  with  the  Vorarlberg,  and  several  Bishoprics  and 
minor  principalities :  to  Wurtemberg  (also  converted  into  a  king- 
dom) and  to  Baden  she  ceded  her  outlying  provinces  in  Western 
Germany. 

Keconsti-        Austria  thus  lost  3,000,000  subjects  and  large  revenues ; 

Germany  was  cut  off  from  Italy,  from  Switzerland  and  from 
the  Rhine;  and  was  reduced  to  the  rank  of  a  third- 
rate  Power.  The  time  had  now  come  for  the  final  recon- 


THE  CONSULATE  AND  THE  EMPIRE  81 

stitution  of  Germany,  long  contemplated  by  Napoleon,  and 
on  19th  July,  1806,  the  Confederation  of  the  Rhine  was 
formally  proclaimed  under  his  Protectorate.  The  Kings 
of  Bavaria  and  Wiirtemberg,  the  Grand  Dukes  of  Baden, 
Hesse — Darmstadt  and  Berg,  the  Archbishop  of  Mainz, 
and  nine  minor  princes  definitely  separated  from  the 
German  Empire  and  accepted  the  Protection  of  Napoleon, 
whom  they  pledged  themselves  to  support  with  an  army 
of  63,000  men.  On  1st  August,  1806,  France  formally 
declared  that  she  no  longer  recognised  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  and  on  6th  August,  1806,  that  venerable  institu- 
tion came  to  a  dishonoured  end.  It  had  long  since  ceased 
to  be  effective,  but  it  was  at  least  a  symbol  of  German 
unity,  and  its  dissolution  marked  the  attainment  of  an 
end  for  which  France  had  been  struggling  for  centuries. 
The  work  of  Richelieu,  of  Mazarin  and  of  Louis  XIV. 
was  thus  consummated  by  Napoleon.  Meanwhile,  the 
Emperor  Francis  II.  became  Hereditary  Emperor  of 
Austria  under  the  title  of  Francis  I. 

The  Treaty  of  Pressburg  marks  an  epoch  of  immense 
significance  in  the  history  of  the  Napoleonic  Empire. 
Henceforth  Napoleon  was  in  truth  a  second  Charlemagne, 
a  veritable  Emperor  of  the  West;  and  just,  as  in  an 
earlier  period,  the  French  Republic  had  surrounded  itself 
with  client  Republics,  so  the  new  Charlemagne  sur- 
rounded himself  with  dependent  kingdoms.  The  Dukes 
of  Bavaria  and  Wiirtemberg  were,  as  we  have  seen,  ad- 
vanced to  kingly  rank  ;  Ferdinand  of  Naples  was  de- 
clared, by  the  same  fiat,  to  have  forfeited  his  crown, 
which  was  assigned  to  Joseph  Bonaparte ;  the  Batavian 
Republic  was  transformed  into  the  kingdom  of  Holland 
for  another  brother,  Louis  (1806),  and  a  year  later  a 
kingdom  of  Westphalia  (1807)  was  carved  out  of  North 
6 


82  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Germany  at  the  expense  of  Prussia,    Hanover,  Bruns- 
wick and  Hesse  for  a  third  brother,  Jerome. 

Austerlitz  had  indeed  avenged  Trafalgar.  It  had  done 
more:  it  had  hastened  the  end  of  William  Pitt.  The 
great  English  statesman  died  on  23rd  January,  1806. 
The  historians  of  the  last  generation,  notably  Lord 
Macaulay,  were  wont  to  deride  Pitt  as  an  incompe- 
tent war  minister.  The  juster  view  is  now  beginning 
to  prevail  that  Pitt  did  more  than  any  other  single  man, 
Nelson  and  Wellington  hardly  excepted,  to  save  England 
and  to  save  Europe  from  the  domination  of  the  Corsican 
adventurer.  He  died  indeed  at  a  moment  of  gloom,  so 
deep  as  hardly  to  be  relieved  by  Nelson's  great  victory, 
but  his  primary  task  was  already  implicitly  accomplished. 
Napoleon  had  made  himself  master  of  the  Continent, 
but  that  was  only  half  his  task.  He  had  yet  to  face 
the  mistress  of  the  sea.  Austerlitz  might  dazzle  con- 
temporaries, but  Napoleon's  ultimate  defeat,  unless  he  was 
prepared  to  abandon  the  dearest  ambition  of  his  heart, 
had  been  already  assured  by  the  seamanship  of  Nelson 
and  the  tenacity  of  Pitt. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

TILSIT  AND  THE  CONTINENTAL  SYSTEM 

Take  special  care  that  the  ladies  of  your  establishment  drink 
Swiss  tea  ;  it  is  as  good  as  that  of  China.  Let  them  take  care  also 
that  no  part  of  their  dress  is  composed  of  English  merchandise ; 
tell  that  to  Madame  Junot ;  if  the  wives  of  my  chief  officers  do  not 
set  the  example,  whom  can  I  expect  to  follow  it  ?  It  is  a  contest  of 
life  or  death  between  France  and  England ;  I  must  look  for  the  most 
cordial  support  in  all  those  by  whom  I  am  surrounded. — NAPOLEON 
TO  JUNOT,  23rd  November,  1806. 

I  will  no  longer  tolerate  an  English  ambassador  in  Europe.  I 
will  declare  war  against  any  Power  that  receives  one.  .  .  .  The 
English  no  longer  respect  neutrals  at  sea  ;  I  will  no  longer  respect 
neutrals  on  land. — NAPOLEON  TO  PORTUGAL. 

A  USTERLITZ  smashed  the  Third  Coalition  and 
jf~\.  knocked  Austria  out  of  the  game,  but  it  did  not 
end  the  war.  Russia  retired  to  recruit  her  forces ;  Fox, 
after  Pitt's  death,  entered  upon  negotiations  with  France, 
but  a  new  enemy  was  forthcoming  from  an  unexpected 
quarter.  Prussia  at  last  turned  against  Napoleon. 

For  more  than  ten  years  Prussia  had  been  a  negligible  polic 
quantity  in  the  politics  of  Western  Europe.      More  re-  Prussia 
sponsible  than  any  other  Power  for  the  initiation  of  the 
contest  against  Revolutionary  France,  Prussia,  with  her 
eyes  fixed  upon  Poland,  had  retired  from  the  war  at  an 
early   stage    (1795). l      Prussia   was  now  suffering  the 

i  See  p.  54. 
83 


84  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Nemesis  which  awaits  all  over-centralised  autocracies. 
The  administrative  system  bequeathed  by  the  great 
Frederick  to  his  successors  had  fallen  into  hopeless  chaos 
and  corruption.  The  mainspring  had  gone,  and  the 
machinery  had  rusted.  Mirabeau  had  foretold  the  disas- 
ter now  so  near  at  hand.  "  The  Prussian  monarchy  is  so 
constituted  that  it  cannot  bear  up  under  any  calamity." 
The  army,  in  particular,  was  in  a  miserable  state.  The 
officers,  still  drawn  exclusively  from  the  noble  caste, 
were  mostly  very  old,  or  very  ignorant,  or  both.  The 
rank  and  file — so  far  as  they  were  native — were  serfs 
"compelled  to  defend  a  country  which  starved  them" 
(Seeley).  There  was  perhaps  some  reason  for  the  persist- 
ent refusal  of  Frederick  William  III.  to  be  drawn  from  a 
policy  of  neutrality.  Many  efforts  had  been  made  to 
draw  him.  So  late  as  1805  Napoleon  had  vainly  offered 
him  Hanover  and  the  Imperial  Crown.  The  efforts  of 
Austria  and  Russia  had  been  equally  fruitless.  Neither 
cajolery,  threats  nor  humiliations  seemed  potent  to 
affect  the  stolid  neutrality  of  Frederick  William.  But 
when,  in  October,  1805,  Bernadotte  marched  his  army 
through  the  Prussian  territory  of  Anspach  the  insult  was 
bitterly  resented  at  Berlin.  Haugwitz  was  despatched 
with  an  ultimatum  to  Napoleon,  who  played  with  him  un- 
til after  Austerlitz,  and  then  dictated  the  Treaty  of  Schon- 
brunn.  Napoleon's  supreme  object  was  to  add  to  the 
number  of  England's  enemies.  Hence  the  humiliating 
and  embarrassing  gift  of  Hanover  to  Prussia.  Fox 
justly  described  Prussia's  conduct  in  accepting  it  as  "  a 
compound  of  everything  that  is  contemptible  in  servility, 
with  everything  that  is  odious  in  rapacity  ".  But  as  far 
as  England  was  concerned  the  only  result  was  the  seizure 
of  some  400  Prussian  ships  in  English  ports,  and  the 


TILSIT  AND  THE  CONTINENTAL  SYSTEM        85 

annihilation  of  Prussia's  maritime  commerce.  Great 
was  the  indignation  of  Prussia  when  she  learnt  (6th 
August,  1806)  that  in  negotiation  with  England  Napo- 
leon had  offered  to  restore  Hanover.  The  temper  of 
the  Court,  roused  to  a  sense  of  its  degradation  by  the 
patriotic  Queen  Louisa,  found  an  echo  in  the  popular 
indignation  excited  by  the  judicial  murder  of  a  Niirnberg 
bookseller,  Palm,  who  was  shot  (25th  August)  by  Napoleon 
for  circulating  a  patriotic  pamphlet,  Germany  in  her 
Deep  Humiliation.  On  1st  October,  1806,  Prussia  de- 
clared war  on  France.  Her  action,  hitherto  procrastina- 
ting, was  now  foolishly  precipitate.  Austria  lay  crushed 
under  Napoleon's  heel ;  Russia  was  not  ready  for  a 
renewal  of  the  fray ;  England  could  give  no  immediate 
help.  The  whole  wrath  of  Napoleon  was  concentrated 
upon  Prussia,  and  the  disastrous  defeats  of  Jena  and 
Auerstadt  (14th  October)  were  the  result.  The  power 
of  Prussia  was  annihilated  at  a  single  blow,  and  within 
a  fortnight  Napoleon  was  master  of  the  whole  of 
Brandenburg.  One  after  another  the  great  fortresses, 
Erfurt,  Halle,  Spandau  opened  their  gates,  and  on  27th 
October  Napoleon  entered  Berlin  in  triumph.  Saxony, 
erected  into  a  kingdom,  was  drawn  into  the  Rhenish  Con- 
federation ;  Weimar  and  four  other  small  Duchies  went 
with  her;  Brunswick  and  Hesse-Cassel  were  converted 
into  the  kingdom  of  Westphalia  for  Jerome  Bonaparte. 

But  Napoleon's  eyes  were  fixed  on  England,  not  on  The  Con- 
Germany.     From   Berlin   he   issued  the  famous  Decree  s 
which  inaugurated  the  Continental  System.     "  I  mean," 
he  said,  "  to  recover  with  my  land  armies  the  Cape  and 
Surinam."     England   itself   Napoleon  could   not  reach ; 
he  determined,  therefore,  to  bring  her  to  her  knees  by 
the  ruin  of  her  trade.     The  Berlin  Decree  was  the  first 


86  THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

instalment  of  this  policy.  It  declared  the  British  Isles 
to  be  in  a  state  of  blockade ;  interdicted  all  trade  with 
England ;  ordered  all  British  merchandise  to  be  confis- 
cated wherever  found,  and  all  British  subjects  prisoners 
of  war :  and  forbade  the  reception  in  French  or  allied 
ports  of  any  ship  coming  from  Great  Britain  or  her 
colonies. 

The  boycott  of  British  trade  was  further  extended  by 
Decrees  issued  from  Warsaw  (25th  January,  1807),  Milan 
(17th  December,  1807)  and  Fontainebleau  (18th  October, 
1810).  The  British  Government  retaliated  in  a  series  of 
Orders  in  Council  (January-November,  1807)  which  de- 
clared all  ports  from  which  the  British  flag  was  excluded 
to  be  in  a  state  of  blockade ;  prohibited  any  ship  from  en- 
tering a  French  or  allied  port ;  and  declared  any  ship  pro- 
ceeding to  such  a  port  and  paying  customs  there,  good 
prize,  unless  it  had  touched  at  a  British  port.  Between 
the  Decrees  launched  by  Napoleon  and  the  British  reprisals 
there  was  this  essential  difference  :  Great  Britain  had 
the  power  of  rendering  them  effective ;  Napoleon  had 
not.  Both  have  been  subjected  to  serious  criticism, 
perhaps  in  neither  case  wholly  deserved.  The  situation 
was  without  precedent.  The  struggle  was  a  entrance, 
but  the  two  protagonists  had  no  common  element  on 
which  to  fight.  Napoleon  was  master  of  the  continent : 
England  was  mistress  of  the  seas.  Neither  could  directly 
assail  the  other.  Thus  the  Continental  System,  however 
disastrous  in  its  ultimate  effects,  must  be  regarded  not  so 
much  as  the  gratuitous  insolence  of  overweening  pride 
but  as  the  last  throw  of  a  political  gambler  compelled  by 
the  exigencies  of  the  game  to  risk  all  or  face  ruin.  In  a 
word,  the  Continental  System  was  forced  upon  Napoleon 
by  Nelson's  last  and  greatest  victory  at  Trafalgar. 


TILSIT  AND  THE  CONTINENTAL  SYSTEM        87 

Meanwhile  Napoleon,  master  of  Brandenburg,  ad- Napoleon 
vanced  to  the  Vistula,  beyond  which  the  Prussian  Court in 
had  retired.  The  familiar  tactics  were  repeated.  Napo- 
leon proclaimed  himself  the  restorer  of  an  annihilated 
nationality,  and  the  Poles  were  summoned  to  strike  a 
blow  for  independence.  They  flocked  in  thousands  to 
Napoleon's  standard  :  but  the  Russians  fought  stubbornly 
behind  the  Vistula.  At  Eylau  (8th  February,  1807) 
Napoleon  was  checked  by  the  Russians ;  but  at  Friedland 
(14th  June)  he  won  a  decisive  victory,  and  the  great  fort- 
resses of  Danzig  and  Konigsberg  fell  into  his  hands.  The 
Russians  and  Prussians  were  driven  across  the  Niemen, 
and  accepted  an  armistice  which  paved  the  way  for  the 
famous  Treaty  of  Tilsit. 

With  characteristic  rapidity  Napoleon  had  determined  Peace  of 
on  a  new  move.  The  relations  between  Russia  and  Eng-  llS1 ' 
land  were  none  too  good,  why  not  come  to  terms  with 
the  Czar  and  so  add  another  to  England's  enemies  ?  Such 
was  the  object  of  the  historic  interview  between  Napoleon 
and  Alexander  in  a  floating  pavilion  moored  in  the  middle 
of  the  Niemen  (25th  June,  1807).  The  bargain  was  soon 
struck.  Prussia  was  to  be  dismembered ;  England  to  be 
crushed  and  ruined ;  Napoleon  and  Alexander  to  divide 
the  world  between  them.  The  details  were  embodied  in 
the  Treaty  of  Tilsit  (with  Russia,  7th  July)  :— 

By  this :  Russia  recognised  the  Napoleonic  kingdoms  of  Naples, 
Holland  and  Westphalia  ;  the  Confederation  of  the  Rhine ;  the 
Duchy  of  Warsaw,  under  Saxony  ;  and  Dantzic,  as  a  free  city.  The 
Vistula  was  to  be  the  western  boundary  of  Russia,  and  the  latter 
agreed  to  mediate  between  France  and  England.  The  treaty  with 
Prussia  (9th  July,  1807)  deprived  the  Hohenzollern  of  all  their 
provinces  west  of  the  Elbe,  and  of  all  their  acquisitions  since  1772 
from  Poland  ;  imposed  upon  them  a  crushing  indemnity,  and  re- 


88  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

quired  them  to  recognise  the  Napoleonic  kingdoms  and  to  keep 
their  harbours  closed  against  English  trade. 

Terms  more  onerous  and  humiliating  have  rarely  been 
imposed  upon  a  defeated  foe.  But  even  more  significant 
was  the  secret  arrangement  between  Napoleon  and 
Alexander. 

By  this :  Russia  was  to  cede  the  Ionian  islands  to  France,  and  to 
make  common  cause  with  her  if  England  did  not  come  to  terms  by 
1st  November.  In  return  she  was  to  get  Finland  from  Sweden ; 
Moldavia  and  Wallachia  from  Turkey  ;  while  Sweden,  Denmark  and 
Portugal  were  to  be  coerced  into  war  with  England. 

Such  was  the  basis  of  the  Tilsit  conspiracy — a  con- 
spiracy designed  for  the  ruin  of  Great  Britain. 
England  Fortunately  for  this  country  the  Foreign  Office  had  lately 
Danish6  passed  into  the  hands  of  Canning.  Canning  got  wind  of 
Fleet  the  secret  agreement,  and  in  order  to  anticipate  Napoleon 
at  once  despatched  an  English  fleet  to  Copenhagen.  Den- 
mark was  required  to  deposit  its  fleet  with  England,  under 
pledge  that  it  should  be  restored  intact  on  the  conclusion 
of  the  war.  *  Denmark  naturally  refused,  and  England 
was  under  the  disagreeable  necessity  of  bombarding 
Copenhagen  and  taking  the  fleet  by  force.  Canning's 
action  must  be  justified  by  the  law  of  self-preservation. 
Napoleon  had  himself  declared  the  impossibility  of  neu- 
trality; the  Danish  fleet  was  a  pawn  of  considerable 
importance ;  it  had  to  be  borrowed  either  by  England  or 
France,  and  England  could  at  least  offer  better  security 
both  for  principal  and  interest.  Canning's  promptitude 
countermined  the  Tilsit  conspiracy. 

Attack  on       Foiled   in  the   Baltic  Napoleon   turned   next   to   the 

Portugal     Iberian  Peninsula.     In  1801  he  had  compelled  Spain  to 

attack  Portugal  in  order  to  force  the  latter  to  close  her 

ports  to  English  commerce.     This  step  was  fatal  to  the 


TILSIT  AND  THE  CpNTINENTAL  SYSTEM        89 

trade  of  Portugal,  and  in  1804  she  purchased  from 
Napoleon  a  formal  recognition  of  neutrality.  After  Tilsit 
this  arrangement  no  longer  suited  Napoleon's  conveni- 
ence. Accordingly  he  determined  to  revoke  the  neu- 
trality, to  partition  Portugal  and  to  seize  its  fleet.  As 
a  preliminary  he  demanded  the  adhesion  of  Portugal 
to  the  Continental  System;  the  seizure  of  all  English 
subjects  and  property  within  the  kingdom,  and  an  immedi- 
ate declaration  of  war  against  England.  Portugal  hesi- 
tated to  comply.  Hesitation  was  enough.  Junot,  at  the 
head  of  a  large  army  already  collected  on  the  Spanish 
frontier,  crossed  the  Bidassoa  on  19th  October  and  advanced 
against  Portugal;  the  royal  family  escaped,  under  the 
protection  of  the  English  fleet,  to  Brazil ;  one  day  later 
(1st  December,  1807)  Junot  entered  Lisbon,  and  a  declara- 
tion was  issued  that  "  the  House  of  Braganza  had  ceased 
to  reign".  But  Napoleon  was  forestalled.  The  Portu- 
guese fleet  was  saved.  The  attack  upon  Portugal,  insigni- 
ficant in  itself,  proved  to  be  the  opening  of  one  of  the 
most  momentous  chapters  in  European  history.  Hitherto 
Napoleon  had  been  at  war  mainly  with  Governments,  and 
one  Government  after  another  had  gone  down  before  him. 
He  was  now  to  come  into  conflict  with  a  people,  and 
thus  to  evoke,  in  antagonism  to  himself,  the  potent  force 
of  nationality.  Tilsit,  so  commonly  regarded  as  the 
zenith  of  Napoleon's  career,  marks,  in  reality,  the  begin- 
ning of  his  decline.  To  all  outward  seeming  his  power 
was  never  more  dazzling,  never  more  intact.  But  the 
seeds  of  decay  had  been  already  sown,  and  the  harvest, 
though  distant,  was  assured. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  NATIONALIST  REACTION 

THE  PENINSULA — GERMANY 

From  Spain  the  living  spark  went  forth  : 
The  flame  hath  caught,  the  flame  hath  spread  ! 

It  warms,  it  fires  the  furthest  North. 
Behold  1  the  awakened  Moscovite 
Meets  the  tyrant  in  his  might ; 
The  Brandenburg,  at  Freedom's  call, 
Rises  more  glorious  from  his  fall ; 
And  Frederic,  best  and  greatest  of  the  name, 
Treads  in  the  path  of  duty  and  of  fame. 
See  Austria  from  her  painful  trance  awake  ! 
The  breath  of  God  goes  forth — the  dry  bones  shake  ! 
Up  Germany  !  with  all  thy  nations  rise  ! 
Land  of  the  virtuous  and  the  wise, 
N'o  longer,  let  that  free  that  mighty  mind 
Endure  its  shame  !     She  rose  as  from  the  dead, 
She  broke  her  chains  upon  the  oppressor's  head. 
Glory  to  God  !     Deliverance  for  Mankind  ! l 

SOUTHEY,  Carmen  Triumphale,  1813. 

Napoleon  1\J  APOLEON'S  attack  on  Portugal  was  only  the  pre- 
and  Spain  1>|  iu(je  fa  a  much  larger  enterprise.  Spain,  like 
Prussia,  had  retired  from  the  first  coalition  in  1795,  and  for 
the  last  twelve  years  had  acted  as  a  vassal  state  of  France. 
Under  the  influence  of  his  minister  Godoy,  the  feeble 
Charles  IV.  had  done  little  but  register  the  edicts  which 
issued  from  Paris.  He  declared  war,  concluded  peace 

1 1  quote  these  lines  for  their  historical  not  their  literary  value. 

90 


THE  NATIONALIST  REACTION  91 

and  again  made  war,  obediently  at  the  bidding  of  France, 
and  invariably  to  his  own  detriment.  Still  Napoleon 
was  unsatisfied.  "  Un  Bourbon  sur  le  trone  d'Espagne, 
c'est  un  voisin  trop  dangereux."  After  Tilsit,  therefore, 
he  determined  to  expel  the  feeble  dynasty,  to  make  Spain 
a  dependency  of  France,  and  to  put  one  of  his  own 
brothers  on  the  throne.  The  domestic  quarrels  among 
the  Spanish  Bourbons  and  the  refractoriness  of  Portugal 
gave  him  his  chance.  On  27th  October,  1807,  the  Treaty 
of  Fontainebleau  was  concluded. 

By  this :  Portugal  and  her  colonies  were  to  be  partitioned  be- 
tween the  King  of  Etruria,  the  Spanish  minister  Godoy,  and 
France.  The  first  was  a  Spanish  prince  who  was  to  surrender 
Tuscany  to  Napoleon's  kingdom  of  Italy ;  Charles  IV.  was  to  be 
dowered  with  half  the  colonies  of  Portugal  and  become  "  Emperor 
of  the  two  Americas  ".  Spain  was,  in  return,  to  join  in  the  attack 
on  Portugal. 

That  attack,  as  we  have  seen,  had  already  begun.  Its 
immediate  purpose  was  frustrated,  but  it  left  France 
virtually  in  military  occupation  of  Spain.  By  a  series 
of  unblushin|^ntrigues,  Napoleon  then  proceeded  to 
push  aside  tifffig,  the  heir  and  the  minister.  Charles 
IV.,  Ferdinano^rince  of  the  Asturias,  and  Godoy,  "  Prince 
of  the  Peace,"  were  lured  separately  to  Bayonne  ;  there 
the  King  and  Prince  were  compelled  to  execute  an  abdica- 
tion of  the  throne,  and  a  handful  of  Spanish  Grandees 
were  induced  to  elect  to  the  vacant  throne  Joseph  Bona- 
parte, who  was  forthwith  crowned  at  Madrid  (July,  1808). 
Joachim  Murat,  who  had  prepared  the  way  for  Joseph 
in  Spain,  was  rewarded  by  the  succession  to  the  throne 
of  Naples. 

Meanwhile  Joseph's  tenure  in  Madrid  was  uncertain  ^e 
and  brief.     Napoleon  might  indeed  push  aside  the  feeble  |^lsh 


92  THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Spanish  Bourbons,  but  it  was  only  to  find  himself  con- 
fronted by  the  Spanish  people.  To  impose  his  yoke  upon 
a  people,  loosely  united  among  themselves,  intensely  pro- 
vincial in  sentiment  and  long  inured  to  guerilla  warfare, 
proved  to  be  no  easy  task.  To  Napoleon  himself  the 
uprising  of  a  people  was  a  strange  phenomenon,  as  yet 
undreamt  of  in  his  philosophy.  He  was  destined  to 
learn  more  of  it  before  long.  No  sooner  was  Joseph 
nominated  to  Madrid  than  Spain  blazed  forth  into  angry 
resistance.  Committees  or  Juntas  were  speedily  organised 
in  the  different  provinces ;  troops  were  enrolled ;  more 
than  one  repulse  was  inflicted  upon  the  seasoned  soldiers 
of  France,  and  on  19th  July,  1808,  Dupont  was  com- 
pelled to  capitulate  with  his  whole  army,  at  Baylen. 
Joseph  fled  from  Madrid  on  1st  August,  and  on  the  15th 
Palafox  successfully  defended  Saragossa.  The  Spanish 
rising  had  opened  a  new  chapter  in  the  history  of  the 
Napoleonic  era.  The  nationalist  reaction  had  begun. 
England  England,  to  whom  the  Spanish  patriots  applied  for 
Peninsular  ne^P'  a^  once  realised  its  significance.  Canning  in  parti- 
War  cular  perceived  the  potentialities  of  the  new  force  which 
with  blind  fatuity  and  vulgar  insolence  Napoleon  had 
aroused.  His  response  to  the  application  of  the  Junta 
was  emphatic  and  prompt.  "We  shall  proceed  upon  the 
principle  that  any  nation  of  Europe  which  starts  up  with 
a  determination  to  oppose  a  Power  which,  whether  pro- 
fessing insidious  peace  or  declaring  open  war,  is  the 
common  enemy  of  all  nations,  becomes  instantly  our 
ally."  On  the  principle  announced  by  Canning  England 
acted  throughout  the  remainder  of  the  war. 

Sir  Arthur      On  1st  August  Sir  Arthur  Wellesley  landed  in  Portu- 

s  ey  gal,  and   three  weeks  later  won   a  brilliant  victory  at 

Vimiero  (21st  August).     Unfortunately,  however,  he  was 


THE  NATIONALIST  KEACTION  93 

superseded  by  Sir  Harry  Burrard,  who  concluded  with 
Junot  the  disastrous  Convention  of  Cintra  (30th  August, 
1808).  The  French  were,  indeed,  compelled  to  evacuate 
Portugal,  but  their  army  stores  and  spoils  were  carried  to 
France  in  English  ships.  Wellesley  came  home,  and  Sir 
John  Moore  was  appointed  to  the  supreme  command. 
Moore  was  a  fine  soldier,  but  too  despondent  in  temper 
for  a  war  of  this  special  kind.  Moreover,  Napoleon  had 
himself  assumed  command  in  Spain,  had  defeated  the 
Spanish  forces  near  Burgos  (10th  November),  had  ad- 
vanced on  Madrid,  and  restored  his  brother  Joseph  to  the 
throne  (9th  December).  Moore,  who  had  been  marching 
on  Burgos  "  with  his  hand  always  on  the  bridle,"  deter- 
mined to  retreat  on  Corunna  and  was  killed  at  the 
moment  of  a  brilliant  victory  won  under  the  walls  of 
that  town  (16th  June,  1809).  His  army  returned  to 
England  in  miserable  plight,  but  in  the  spring  Wellesley 
was  appointed  to  the  command.  Portugal  was  quickly 
cleared  of  the  French;  Wellesley  advanced  on  Madrid, 
and  on  27th,  28th  July,  1809,  won  a  great  victory  at 
Talavera.  He  was  obliged  for  the  moment  to  retreat  on 
Portugal,  but  with  Talavera  his  great  career  in  the 
Peninsula  definitely  began.  Thenceforward  for  six  long 
years  he  kept  alight,  through  fortune  good  and  bad,  the 
fire  of  insurrection,  supporting  with  his  organised  forces 
the  guerilla  warfare  of  the  Spaniards  and  Portuguese. 

The  importance  of  that  insurrection  cannot  be  exag- 
gerated. For  the  first  time  England  was  enabled  to 
take  a  leading  and  continuous  part  in  the  military 
operations  of  the  Continent;  Europe  was  taught  that 
Napoleon  was  not  invincible,  and  he  himself  acknowledged 
that  the  "  Spanish  ulcer  "  drained  his  military  and  finan- 
cial strength ;  finally,  an  immense  impulse  was  given  to 


94  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

the  nationalist  movement  in  Germany.  Even  in  the 
Habsburg  dominions,  so  long  dominated  by  absolutist 
ideas,  the  thrill  of  nationalist  sentiment  was  felt. 
Austrian  Ever  since  the  humiliations  heaped  upon  her  at  Press- 
iso?8'  burg,  Austria  had  been  waiting  for  the  opportunity  of 
revenge,  and  steadily  preparing  to  make  it  effective. 
The  Archduke  Charles  had  been  appointed  generalissimo, 
and  with  the  help  of  Count  Stadion  had  thoroughly  re- 
formed the  army  administration.  Incompetent  officers 
were  cashiered;  military  schools  for  the  training  of 
officers  were  opened ;  regulations  were  issued  for  kindly 
treatment  of  the  private  soldier ;  journals  devoted  to  the 
discussion  of  technical  military  problems  were  published ; 
all  able-bodied  men,  between  the  ages  of  nineteen  and 
forty-five,  were  enlisted  in  the  Landwehr,  and  a  reserve 
was  formed  of  nearly  250,000  men;  finally,  an  appeal, 
inspired  by  the  example  of  Spain,  was  issued  to  the 
patriotism  of  the  German  folk  (6th  April,  1809). 
"  Soldiers !  the  freedom  of  Europe  has  sought  refuge 
under  your  colours.  Your  triumphs  will  loose  her  fetters, 
your  German  brethren,  still  in  the  ranks  of  the  enemy, 
await  deliverance  by  you."  The  moment  for  a  national 
rising  in  Germany  against  the  yoke  of  Napoleon  seemed 
eminently  propitious.  Three  hundred  thousand  French 
troops  were  shut  up  in  Spain ;  the  Czar  was  said  to  be 
restless ;  England  was  ready  to  help  anywhere  and  every- 
where ;  North  Germany,  thanks  to  the  work  of  Stein,1 
and  i  Hardenberg,  and  Scharnhorst,  and  Von  Humboldt, 
thanks  not  less  to  the  patriotic  appeals  of  Schiller  ( William 
Tell,  1804)  and  Fichte  (Addresses  to  the  German  Na- 
tion, 1808)  was  ripe  for  revolt;  the  brave  peasants  of 
the  Tyrol,  incorporated  since  1805  in  Napoleon's  mush- 

1  See  p.  107  infra. 


THE  NATIONALIST  KEACTION  95 

room  kingdom  of  Bavaria,  were  eager  for  a  chance  to 
throw  off  the  hateful  yoke ;  everything  seemed  propitious. 
But  in  the  event  everything  was  disastrous. 

Austria  declared  war  on  France  on  15th  April,  1809. 
A  magnificent  army,  under  the  Archduke  Charles,  entered 
Bavaria ;  a  second,  under  the  Archduke  John,  raised  the 
standard  of  revolt  in  the  Tyrol  and  marched  into  Italy  ; 
a  third,  under  the  Archduke  Ferdinand,  advanced  to 
Warsaw.  The  Tyrolese  peasants  fought  with  splendid 
courage,  but  the  regulars  were  badly  led,  and  Napo- 
leon's strategy  once  more  proved  irresistible.  In  a  week's 
campaign  (18th-22nd  April,  1809)  the  Archduke  Charles 
was  forced  back  upon  Vienna,  and  on  13th  May  the 
French  Emperor  was  once  more  in  the  Austrian  capital. 
But  for  the  next  two  months  Napoleon's  position  was 
really  critical,  and  with  good  generalship,  with  any  ap- 
proach to  co-operation  between  the  Austrian  archdukes, 
a  crushing  defeat  might  have  been  inflicted  upon  him. 
As  it  was,  he  was  severely  repulsed,  with  a  loss  of  27,000 
men,  in  the  great  battle  of  Aspern-Essling,  on  the  Danube 
below  Vienna  (21st,  22nd  May,  1809).  The  news  of 
Aspern  was  received  with  a  thrill  throughout  Europe. 
"  In  Prussia,"  wrote  one,  "  the  enthusiasm  is  general ;  the 
spell  is  broken ;  Napoleon  is  no  longer  invincible ! " 
Even  Frederick  William  was  emboldened  to  promise  that 
after  one  more  victory  he  would  throw  in  his  lot  with 
Austria.  The  Duke  of  Brunswick  flung  himself  upon 
Saxony  and  drove  the  King  out  of  Dresden ;  Dornberg 
rose  in  Hesse;  S chill  raised  the  standard  of  revolt  in 
Prussia ;  Westphalia  prepared  to  rise  against  Jerome ; 
England  fitted  out  an  expedition  for  a  descent  upon 
North  Germany.  All  the  portents  were  favourable,  and 
it  seemed  as  though  the  day  of  German  liberation  were 


96  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

at  hand.  But  Napoleon  was  not  beaten  yet.  The  six 
weeks  after  Aspern  were  exceedingly  critical,  but  on  5th 
and  6th  July  he  fought  and  won  the  battle  of  Wagram. 
Wagram  was  not  a  rout  like  Austerlitz,  but  it  was  suffi- 
ciently decisive  to  induce  Austria  to  accept  the  armistice 
of  Znaim  (12th  July),  and  ultimately  to  acquiesce  in  the 
Treaty  of  Vienna  (10th  October,  1809).  Before  the 
treaty  was  concluded  Napoleon's  hands  were  strengthened 
by  the  failure  of  Wellington  to  push  on  after  Talavera, 
and  still  more  by  the  disastrous  issue  of  a  British  ex- 
pedition to  the  Scheldt.  At  the  end  of  July  a  British 
force  of  40,000  men  descended  upon  the  Isle  of  Walcheren, 
with  the  object  of  capturing  Antwerp  and  destroying  the 
French  fleet.  The  idea  was  a  brilliant  one,  but  the 
execution  was  disastrously  feeble,  and  in  September  the 
army,  decimated  by  disease,  returned  to  England. 

The  failure  of  the  English  diversion  enabled  Napoleon 
to  impose  very  severe  terms  upon  Austria  : — 

Treaty  of         Austria  had  to  surrender  Western  Galicia  to  the  Grand  Duchy 

Vienna  or   of  Warsaw  (King  of  Saxony)  and  Eastern  Galicia  to  Russia  ;  Trieste, 

bnnTlOth  Croatia,  Carniola,  and  the  greater  part  of  Carinthia  (the  "Ulyrian 

October,      Provinces  ")  went  to  Napoleon,  and  the  Tyrol  and  the  Vorarlberg, 

together  with  Salzburg  and  a  strip  of  upper  Austria,  were  restored 

to  Bavaria.     Austria  lost  4,500,000  subjects  ;  she  had  to  pay  a  war 

indemnity  of  £3,400,000  ;  to  reduce  her  army  to  150,000  men,  and 

to  promise  strict  adhesion  to  the  Continental  System. 

'  Thus  at  the  end  of  1809  Napoleon's  power  was  to  all 
appearance  not  merely  unbroken,  but  actually  increasing. 
He  advanced  boldly  along  the  path  of  annexation,  and  at 
the  same  time  redoubled  his  efforts  for  the  ruin  and 
humiliation  of  the  only  foe  against  whom  he  was  as  yet 
entirely  impotent. 

To  this  end  a  few  more  turns  were  given  to  the  scre\\T 


™     or--  A 

UN1V 


CENTRAL  EUROPE   in  1810 

^_^  i!u  ) \ 


Kingdom    of  Prussia          SS^  Kingdom    of  Sardinia 

Confederation  oftheRhint      Lv.'.'.l      French   Empire        UJjlj  rfo.        of  Naples 

Kingdom    of  Italy  ty77Z\  do.        of  Sicily 


98  THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Napoleon's  of  the  Continental  System,  and  recalcitrant  or  even  half- 
tions  hearted  vassals  were  ruthlessly  deposed.  The  Pope 
Pius  VII.  refused  to  shut  his  ports  to  English  ships. 
Immediately  the  Papal  States  were  annexed  to  the  king- 
dom of  Italy  (July,  1809),  and  the  Pope — reduced  to  the 
rank  of  a  bishop — found  himself  a  prisoner  at  Savona. 
In  Holland  Louis  Bonaparte  found  the  yoke  of  the  Con- 
tinental System  intolerable  and  resigned  his  crown  (1st 
July,  1810).  Holland  itself  was  formally  incorporated 
in  France  before  the  end  of  the  year.  Shortly  afterwards 
Hamburg  and  other  Hanse  Towns,  the  Duchy  of  Olden- 
burg, half  the  kingdom  of  Westphalia  and  part  of  the 
Grand  Duchy  of  Berg  were  similarly  incorporated.  The 
annexation  of  Oldenburg  caused  friction  with  Russia,  as 
its  Duke  was  the  Czar's  brother-in-law.  But  the  claims 
neither  of  kinship  nor  of  friendship  could  be  permitted 
to  stand  in  Napoleon's  way.  The  Continent  must  at  all 
costs  be  hermetically  sealed  against  English  commerce. 
"  A  puncture  at  any  one  point  must  produce  a  general 
collapse  of  the  experiment"  (Rose).  But  how  long 
could  a  puncture  be  avoided  ?  How  long  would  Europe 
endure  the  strangulation  of  its  commerce  and  the  ruin  of 
its  industries  ?  The  next  two  years  would  show. 
Napoleon's  Early  in  1810  Napoleon's  personal  position  was  sensibly 
t^Marfe  strengthened  by  an  event  of  far-reaching  significance. 
Louise  The  new  Charlemagne  had  no  heir.  His  devoted  wife 
Josephine  was,  therefore,  divorced  at  the  end  of  1809, 
and  negotiations  were  opened  for  a  bride  from  Petersburg 
or  Vienna.  On  1st  April,  1810,  Napoleon  was  married 
to  the  Archduchess  Marie  Louise  of  Austria — a  niece  of 
Marie  Antoinette — and  a  year  later  a  son  was  born  and 
announced  to  the  world  as  King  of  Rome. 

Meanwhile    Wellington,   notwithstanding   the   forced 


THE  NATIONALIST  KEACTION  99 

retreat  after  Talavera,  was  still  holding  the  French  Wellington 
marshals  at  bay,  and  keeping  brilliantly  alight  the  torch 
of  national  resistance  in  Spain  and  Portugal.  Clear  for 
the  moment  of  all  other  complications  Napoleon  deter- 
mined in  1810  to  concentrate  his  efforts  upon  the  Penin- 
sula. By  the  middle  of  that  year  there  were  no  less  than 
370,000  French  troops  in  Spain.  Soult  with  one  great 
army  forced  the  passes  of  the  Sierra  Morena  (20th  Janu- 
ary), captured  Seville  (31st  January),  and  overran  Anda- 
lusia ;  and  later  in  the  year  Massena  with  a  still  stronger 
force  advanced  on  Portugal.  Wellington  had  spent  the 
winter  in  constructing  the  lines  of  Torres  Vedras  behind 
which  he  was  practically  unassailable. 

The  great  fortress  of  Ciudad  Rodrigo  surrendered, 
after  a  gallant  defence,  on  10th  July,  Almeida  on  27th 
August,  but  at  Busaco  (27th  September)  Wellington  in- 
flicted a  severe  defeat  upon  Massena  and  then  retired  be- 
hind the  lines  of  Torres  Vedras.  Outside  them  the  country 
had  been  laid  bare;  the  French  troops  suffered  terrible 
privations,  and  in  March,  1811,  Massena,  having  lost 
30,000  men,  was  compelled  to  retire,  impotent  to  pierce  the 
famous  lines.  Reinforced  from  England  Wellington  was 
now  ready  to  take  the  offensive.  He  defeated  Massena 
at  Fuentes  d'Onoro  (5th  May,  1811),  and  took  Almeida, 
while  his  colleague  Beresford  won  a  brilliant  but  fruitless 
victory  at  Albuera  (16th  May).  The  operations  of  1811 
did  not  seriously  shake  the  French  position  in  the  Penin- 
sula. Badajoz  and  Ciudad  Rodrigo  were  untaken,  Cadiz 
could  not  shake  off  its  blockaders ;  Marmont  was  encamped 
on  Portuguese  soil. 

But  1812  was  a  year  of  triumph  for  English  arms. 
Wellington  made  a  brilliant  dash  on  Ciudad  Rodrigo 
(19th  January,  1812) ;  stormed  Badajoz  (6th  April) ;  and 


100         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

routed  Marmont  at  Salamanca  (22nd  July).  In  conse- 
quence of  these  victories  the  siege  at  Cadiz  was  raised, 
the  French  evacuated  the  south  of  Spain,  Joseph  fled 
from  Madrid,  and  Wellington  entered  the  capital  in 
triumph  (12th  August).  But  he  could  not  hold  Madrid 
nor  take  Burgos.  The  French  reoccupied  the  capital 
in  November,  and  Wellington,  for  the  last  time,  retired 
to  his  winter  quarters  in  Portugal.  In  1813  Soult,  with 
the  flower  of  the  Peninsular  army,  was  withdrawn  to 
Germany.  Wellington  was  now  at  last  ready  to  make 
the  decisive  movement  which  was  to  drive  the  French 
armies  out  of  Spain.  Moving  rapidly  north,  and  leaning 
upon  his  fleet,  he  threatened  the  only  great  military  road 
from  Madrid  to  the  Pyrenees.  The  French  in  haste 
abandoned  the  capital  and  made  for  the  frontier.  But 
Wellington  moved  faster  than  the  French,  blocked  the 
road  at  Vittoria  and  then  inflicted  a  crushing  defeat 
upon  Joseph. 

Wellington  then  determined  to  fight  his  way  across 
the  Pyrenees  into  France.  Soult  was  sent  back  from 
Dresden  to  oppose  him,  but  San  Sebastian  surrendered 
on  30th  August,  Pampeluna  on  31st  October,  and  the 
French  forces  were  steadily  driven  across  the  Pyrenees. 

The  great  struggle  was  virtually  at  an  end.  Wellington 
followed  up  his  successes  on  French  soil  in  the  spring  of 
1814,  but  on  6th  April,  1814,  Napoleon  ceased  to  be 
Emperor  of  the  French.  The  Spanish  insurrection  had 
done  its  work.  Thanks  to  the  dogged  patriotism  of  the 
Spanish  Juntas,  thanks  to  the  splendid  tenacity  and 
skill  of  Wellington,  Napoleon  had  been  compelled  to  keep 
a  large  army  in  the  Peninsula  which  would  have  been 
invaluable  on  the  Elbe.  Though  he  contemptuously 
described  the  struggle  as  a  "  war  of  priests  and  monks,"  he 


The  Campaign  of 
TRAFALGAR 


w% 


to  illustrate 
THE  PENINSULAR  WAR 

ENGLISH   MILi.3 

100  SO  0  100 


102         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

admitted  that  it  acted  as  "  a  running  sore  ".  Unquestion- 
ably it  drained  his  vital  energies,  and  in  no  small  measure 
contributed  to  his  ultimate  defeat,  even  if  it  did  not,  as 
Marbot  asserts,  actually  bring  it  about. 

But  long  before  the  Peninsular  War  was  ended  the 
centre  of  interest,  diplomatic  and  military,  had  shifted 
eastwards. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND    THE  WAR  OF  LIBERATION 
(1812-1814) 

But  now,  rous'd  slowly  from  her  opiate  bed, 
Lethargic  Europe  lifts  the  heavy  head  ; 
Feels  round  her  heart  the  creeping  torpor  close, 
And  starts  with  horror  from  her  dire  repose. 

AT  Tilsit,  as  we  have  seen,  Napoleon  and  the  CzarBreach 
Alexander  agreed  to  divide  the  world  between  p^®" 
them.  But  however  dazzling  the  prospect,  the  actual  Russia 
share  of  the  junior  partner  was  singularly  unsubstantial. 
The  bargain  struck  at  Tilsit  was  renewed  at  Erfurt  (1808). 
About  to  plunge  personally  into  the  Spanish  war  Napoleon 
thought  it  desirable  to  make  assurance  doubly  sure  on 
his  eastern  frontiers.  Accordingly,  in  October,  1808,  the 
Emperor  of  the  West  held  high  court  at  Erfurt  for  a 
fortnight.  There  were  assembled  the  Emperor  of  the 
East,  the  four  vassal  Kings  of  the  Rhenish  Confederation, 
and  a  crowd  of  princes  and  ambassadors.  The  social 
festivities  were  on  a  magnificent  scale,  but  the  diplomatic 
results  did  not  go  much  beyond  Tilsit.  The  Czar  was 
to  receive  Finland  and  the  Danubian  principalities,  and 
in  return  to  recognise  the  Napoleonic  dynasty  in  Spain. 

But  two  years  had  passed  since  Erfurt,  three  since 
Tilsit,  and  Finland  was  still  in  the  hands  of  Sweden, 
Moldavia  and  Wallachia  in  those  of  the  Sultan.  Nor 
were  other  causes  of  alienation  between  the  two  Emperors 

103 


104         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

lacking.  The  continued  encroachments  of  Napoleon 
along  the  north  German  coast — particularly  the  annexa- 
tion of  Oldenburg — caused  growing  uneasiness  at  Peters- 
burg; his  suspicious  solicitude  on  behalf  of  the  Poles 
caused  even  more,  especially  in  view  of  his  marriage 
with  the  Austrian  Archduchess  Marie  Louise  (1st  April, 
1810).  But  all  these  things  were  trifling  compared  with 
the  suffering  and  humiliation  brought  upon  his  vassals 
and  allies  by  the  increasing  stringency  of  the  Continental 
System.  In  the  earlier  stages  of  that  system  a  con- 
siderable number  of  licenses  of  exemption  had  been  issued 
both  by  England  and  France.  These  mitigated  to  some 
extent  the  hardships  which  the  system  entailed ;  but  as 
the  struggle  became  fiercer,  even  these  exemptions  ceased, 
and  terrible  misery  ensued.  A  severe  commercial  crisis 
occurred  in  England  in  1810-11,  but  our  sufferings  were 
as  nothing  compared  with  those  of  France  and  her 
dependencies.  Factories  were  brought  to  a  standstill 
for  lack  of  raw  material;  the  price  of  necessaries  rose 
to  famine  standard ;  credit  collapsed ;  merchants  were 
ruined.  One  illustration  of  the  commercial  dislocation 
must  suffice.  It  is  stated  (by  Dr.  Rose)  that  "owing  to 
the  prohibition  of  all  intercourse  with  England  two 
parcels  of  silk  sent  from  Bergamo  to  London  were 
smuggled,  one  by  way  of  Smyrna,  the  other  by  way  of 
Archangel  to  their  destination :  the  former  took  one  year, 
the  latter  two  years,  in  the  wanderings  necessitated  by 
Napoleon's  Decrees  ".  If  such  were  the  inconveniences  to 
which  England  was  subjected,  despite  her  complete  com- 
mand of  the  sea,  it  is  easy  to  imagine  what  sufferings 
were  endured  by  Frenchmen,  Germans  and  Russians. 
The  time  was  fast  approaching  when  they  became  in- 
tolerable. 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION   105 

And  Napoleon  knew  it.  "  I  shall  have  war  with  Russia 
on  grounds  which  lie  beyond  human  possibilities,  because 
they  are  rooted  in  the  case  itself."  These  were  Napoleon's 
own  words  to  the  Austrian  minister  Metternich  in  the 
autumn  of  1810.  About  the  same  time  the  Czar  had  re- 
fused, despite  the  insistence  of  Napoleon,  to  confiscate,  in 
Russian  harbours,  neutral  ships  carrying  colonial  produce. 
From  that  moment  Napoleon  bent  all  his  energies  to  the 
isolation  of  the  Czar.  Approaches  were  even  made  to 
England,  only,  of  course,  to  be  indignantly  refused. 
Abominably  as  Russia  had  behaved  to  her,  England  was 
still  true  to  Canning's  maxim :  to  be  at  war  with  Napo- 
leon is  to  be  in  alliance  with  England.  Napoleon  then 
tried  the  Turks.  But  the  Sultan  remembered  Tilsit  and 
Erfurt,  and  lending  a  ready  ear  to  the  advice  of  England 
made  opportune  peace  with  Russia  at  Bucharest  (28th 
May,  1812).  Nor  was  Napoleon  more  successful  with 
Sweden.  Marshal  Bernadotte,  who  had  been  chosen  by 
the  Swedish  Estates  as  Crown  Prince  in  1810,  had  long 
been  growing  restless  under  the  rigours  of  his  former 
patron's  Continental  System.  In  November,  1810,  he  had 
been  forced,  much  against  his  will,  into  war  with  England 
— a  war  which  England,  be  it  said,  did  not  resent.  The 
letter  in  which  Napoleon  announced  his  decision  to 
Bernadotte  is  characteristic  enough  to  justify  quotation  : 
"  You  tell  me  that  you  wish  to  remain  at  peace  with 
France,  but  I  say,  let  me  have  proofs  of  this  disposition. 
Foreign  commerce  is  the  present  cheval  de  bataille  of  all 
nations.  I  can  immediately  cause  you  to  be  attacked  by 
the  Danes  and  Russians ;  and  I  will  instantly  do  so  if 
within  fifteen  days  you  are  not  at  war  with  England. 
I  have  been  long  enough  the  dupe  of  Sweden  as  well  as 
of  Prussia ;  but  the  latter  Power  has  at  last  learned  by 


106         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

the  catastrophe  of  Holland  that  it  was  necessary  to 
take  a  decided  line.  I  cannot  reckon  always  on  the 
alliance  of  Russia.  I  loved  the  King  of  Holland,  but 
nevertheless  I  confiscated  his  dominions  because  he  would 
not  obey  my  will.  I  did  the  same  with  the  Swiss. 
They  hesitated  to  confiscate  the  English  goods ;  I  marched 
my  troops  into  their  dominions,  and  they  soon  obeyed. 
On  the  fifteenth  day  from  this,  war  must  be  declared,  or 
my  ambassador  has  orders  to  demand  his  passports. 
Open  war,  or  a  sincere  alliance.  These  are  my  last 
words." 

But  Sweden  came  to  terms  with  Russia  in  April,  1812 
(Treaty  of  Abo),  and  with  England  in  July  (Treaty  of 
Orebro).  By  the  latter  Swedish  ports  were  opened  to 
English  goods ;  by  the  former  Russia  undertook,  in  re- 
turn for  the  co-operation  of  a  Swedish  force  in  North 
Germany,  to  secure  Norway  for  Sweden  at  the  conclusion 
of  peace. 

Thus  Russia  was  protected  on  both  her  outer  flanks : 
by  the  Swedish  alliance  on  the  Baltic,  and  by  the  Treaty 
of  Bucharest  on  her  Southern  frontier. 

But  the  inner  flanks  were  secured,  by  treaties  with 
Austria  and  Prussia,  by  Napoleon.  Austria  promised  in 
return  for  Galicia  to  provide  30,000  men  for  defensive 
purposes ;  Prussia  undertook  to  give  free  passage  across 
Prussian  territory  to  the  "  Grand  Army,"  and  to  provide 
20,000  men  for  offensive  or  defensive  operations,  and 
20,000  more  for  garrison  duty.  Napoleon  in  return 
merely  guaranteed  the  maintenance  of  the  mutilated 
Prussian  kingdom  in  its  status  quo.  This  treaty — "a 
treaty  .  .  .  which  added  the  people  of  Frederick  the 
Great  to  that  inglorious  crowd  which  fought  at  Napoleon's 
orders  against  whatever  remained  of  independence  and 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION     107 

nationality  in  Europe "  (Fyffe) — was  the  despair  of  the 
patriotic  party  in  Prussia. 

For  Prussia  was  no  longer  the  Prussia  which  had  Reforms  in 
succumbed  at  Jena  and  turned  the  cheek  to  the  smiter  at 
Tilsit.  Tilsit  marked  at  once  the  nadir  of  humiliation 
and  the  beginning  of  resurrection.  Of  the  group  of 
patriots  to  whom  the  revival  of  Prussia,  and  ultimately 
of  Germany,  was  due,  by  far  the  greatest  was  Baron  Vom 
Stein  (1757-1831).  To  this  masterful  statesman  Frederick 
William  entrusted  the  direction  of  Prussian  affairs  three 
months  after  Tilsit  (4th  October,  1807).  He  was  in  office 
for  little  more  than  twelve  months,  but  in  that  short 
period  Prussia  was  transformed.  By  the  Edict  of 
Emancipation  (9th  October,  1807)  all  personal  servitude 
was  abolished ;  the  rigid  caste  system  was  broken  down ; 
all  callings  were  thrown  open  to  noble,  citizen  and 
peasant  alike;  free  trade  in  land  was  established,  and 
land  was  left  free  to  pass  from  hand  to  hand  and 
class  to  class.  Thus  the  Prussian  peasants  became 
personally  free,  but  they  were  still  bound  to  render  fixed 
rents  to  their  lords.  A  further  measure  of  reform  was 
due  to  Hardenberg,  who  by  his  agrarian  law  of  1811 
abolished  dual  ownership  and  converted  peasant  copy- 
holders into  proprietors.  One-third  of  the  holding  was 
surrendered  to  the  lord  in  commutation  of  all  feudal  dues, 
and  the  remaining  two-thirds  was  retained  by  the  peasant 
owners  in  full  and  unshackled  proprietorship.  But  the 
agrarian  legislation  did  not  stand  alone.  By  the  Muni- 
cipal Act  (1808)  Stein  carried  through  a  large  measure  for 
the  reform  of  local  self-government.  The  towns  were 
freed  from  their  dependence  upon  the  feudal  lords  or  the 
central  government,  and  the  administration  of  their  affairs 
was  entrusted  to  elected  Councils.  The  central  government 


108         THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

was  similarly  reformed  by  the  establishment  of  a  respon- 
sible ministerial  cabinet,  and  but  for  the  fact  that  in  the 
very  midst  of  his  reforming  activity  (December,  1808) 
he  was  sent  into  exile  at  the  bidding  of  Napoleon,  there 
is  no  doubt  that  Stein  would  have  crowned  the  edifice  he 
was  erecting  by  the  establishment  of  a  regular  parlia- 
mentary constitution.  An  ardent  disciple  of  Turgot  and 
Adam  Smith,  Stein  also  did  much  to  emancipate  Prussian 
industry. 

Not  less  important  were  the  measures  simultaneously 
taken  for  the  reorganisation  of  national  defence.  This  was 
primarily  the  work  of  Stein's  colleagues  Scharnhorst  and 
Gneisenau.  The  old  system,  based  upon  the  caste  prin- 
ciple, had  demonstrated  its  futility  at  Jena.  After  Erfurt 
Napoleon  ordered  that  the  Prussian  army  should  be  re- 
duced to  42,000  men.  This  was  Scharnhorst's  opportunity. 
Henceforth  every  Prussian  citizen  was  to  be  trained  to 
the  use  of  arms.  The  active  army  was  limited  to  40,000  ; 
but  after  a  short  service  with  the  colours  the  citizen  was 
to  pass  into  the  reserve,  and  in  addition  there  was  to  be 
a  Landwehr  for  defensive  service  at  home,  and  a  Land- 
sturm — or  general  arming  of  the  population  for  guerilla 
warfare. 

What  Scharnhorst  did  for  national  defence  Yon  Hum- 
boldt  effected  for  national  education.  Thus  economically, 
politically,  militarily  and  educationally  Prussia  was  trans- 
formed between  1807  and  1812.  Most  of  all,  a  new 
spirit  was  breathed  into  the  Prussian  people,  a  spirit 
which,  though  often  repressed  and  sometimes  quiescent, 
was  destined  to  lead  to  the  ultimate  triumph  of  1870. 
"  We  must,"  said  Stein,  "  keep  alive  in  the  nation  the 
spirit  of  discontent  with  their  oppression,  with  our  de- 
pendence on  a  foreign  nation,  insolent  and  growing  daily 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION     109 

more   frivolous.  .  .  .  The  war   must   be  waged  for  the 
liberation  of  Germany  by  Germans." 

In  1812  it  seemed  as  though  the  moment  for  the  war 
of  liberation  had  come.  Stein,  now  in  Russia,  and  acting 
as  the  unofficial  adviser  of  the  Czar,  was  strongly  in 
favour  of  a  definite  and  open  alliance  between  Prussia 
and  Russia.  By  such  an  alliance  Prussia  had  everything 
to  •  gain  and  little  to  lose.  But  the  timid  Frederick 
William  III.  was  still  unable  to  shake  off  the  hypnotic 
influence  of  Napoleon,  and  Hardenberg  reluctantly  as- 
sented to  the  humiliating  terms  detailed  above. 

The  preparations  for  the  great  Russian  campaign  were  The 
now  all  but  complete.  To  the  whole  enterprise  there 
was  strong  opposition  in  France.  Mollien  (the  finance 
minister)  insistently  urged  upon  his  master  the  embarrass- 
ment which  it  would  cause  to  French  finance.  "  Because 
the  finances  are  embarrassed,  they  need  war,"  was 
Napoleon's  retort.  To  no  counsels  of  prudence  would  he 
listen ;  to  no  such  counsels  could  he  listen.  The  Russian 
campaign  has  been  described  as  the  most  gratuitous  and 
causeless  of  all  Napoleon's  military  enterprises.  Those 
only  can  regard  it  as  causeless  who  fail  to  grasp  the 
essential  fact  of  the  situation.  Delenda  est  Carthago. 
Napoleon's  one  real  enemy  was  England.  England  could 
be  reached,  if  at  all,  only  through  her  commerce.  From  the 
rigid  rule  of  the  Continental  System  no  deviation,  there- 
fore, could  be  permitted.  Thus  as  Seeley  has  insisted : — 

"  Russia's  partial  abandonment  of  the  Continental 
System  was  not  merely  a  pretext  but  the  real  ground  of 
the  war.  Napoleon  had  no  alternative  between  fighting 
for  his  system  and  abandoning  the  only  method  open  to 
him  of  carrying  on  war  against  England." 

War   was    declared   on   12th   April,   1812.      In   May 


110         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Napoleon  held  a  great  reception  at  Dresden  to  encourage 
his  allies,  and  on  24th  June  he  crossed  the  Niemen  at 
the  head  of  an  army  of  680,000  men.  This  great  host 
was  composed  of  the  Imperial  Guard  and  the  flower  of 
the  French  army — perhaps  250,000  men  in  all;  about 
150,000  Germans  from  the  Rhenish  Confederation ;  80,000 
Italians  under  Murat ;  60,000  Poles,  and  a  miscellaneous 
crowd  of  Dutchmen  and  Spaniards,  Swiss,  Portuguese 
and  Illyrians.  It  was  not  only  the  largest  but  the  most 
curiously  cosmopolitan  army  ever  put  into  the  field  in 
modern  days.  To  this  were  at  first  opposed  some 
400,000  Russian  troops  under  the  supreme  command  of 
Barclay  de  Tolly. 

Napoleon's  precise  plan  of  campaign  is  still  matter  of 
controversy.1  "To  reach  Smolensko  in  1812;  to  liberate 
Lithuania ;  to  march  on  to  Moscow  in  1813,  and  then  in 
the  ancient  capital  of  the  Russians  to  receive  the  sub- 
mission of  the  Czar."  Such,  according  to  ^Metternich, 
was  Napoleon's  plan.  But  whatever  his  intentions, 
Napoleon  was  drawn  on,  in  part  by  the  coolness  of  his 
reception  in  Poland,  still  more  by  the  Russian  tactics. 
Barclay  retreated  towards  Petersburg,  another  Russian 
general  Bagration  towards  Moscow,  and  no  pitched  battle 
was  fought.  Smolensko,  the  great  fortress  which  barred 
the  entrance  to  Russia  proper,  was  abandoned  after  a 
brief  resistance,  and  once  more  the  French  were  lured  on 
to  their  doom.  The  population,  fanatically  hostile,  re- 
treated before  the  French  army,  devastating  their  country 
and  burning  their  towns.  On  the  7th  of  September  the 
Russians  turned  at  Borodino,  and  there  the  first  pitched 
battle  of  the  campaign  was  fought;  50,000  Russians  and 
30,000  Frenchmen  fell.  A  week  later  Napoleon  was  in 

JFor  a  criticism  of  it  cf.  "Marshal  Marmont,"  ap.  Greville : 
Memoirs,  ii,  35. 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION    111 

Moscow  in  command  of  a  capital  deserted  by  the  in- 
habitants and  devoted  to  the  flames.  For  fourteen  days 
the  conflagration  raged.  In  Moscow,  however,  he  tarried 
for  two  months  (15th  September-19th  October),  waiting 
for  the  submission  that  never  came.  Gradually  the 
position  became  unendurable ;  the  French  force  was  de- 
cimated by  disease,  but  it  was  impossible  to  feed  even  the 
remnant  of  it. 

On  19th  October  the  retreat  began.  To  avoid  the 
wasted  country  Napoleon  marched  southwards,  but  the 
battle  of  Maro-Jaroslavitz  (24th  October)  forced  him  to 
fall  back  on  the  already  devastated  route ;  the  retreat,  con- 
stantly harassed  by  the  Russians  under  Kutusoff,  became 
a  flight  after  the  battle  of  Krasnoi  (15th  November),  and 
after  the  passage  of  the  Beresina  (26th-28th  November) 
it  became  a  rout. 

The  bitter  Russian  winter  intensified  the  sufferings 
of  the  starved  army;  Napoleon  deserted  it  on  5th 
December,  and  made  his  way  to  Paris,  and  on  13th 
December  a  ragged  remnant  of  perhaps  100,000  men 
re-crossed  the  Niemen  and  made  their  way  to  Leipzic. 
Not  less  than  half  a  million  men  had  been  sacrificed  in 
this  disastrous  campaign. 

What  was  its  nett  result  ?     That  it  gave  the  coup  de  Eesuits  of 
grace  to  Napoleon  cannot  be  affirmed.      Within  three 
months  he  had  raised,  by  incomparable  energy,  a  newcow 
army ;  the  loyalty  of  France  was  unbroken ;  the  Rhenish 
Confederation  showed  no  sign  of  defection ;  Austria  re- 
fused to  throw  in  her  lot  with  his  enemies;  Frederick 
William  of  Prussia  still  hesitated  to  break  with  him,  and 
Alexander  himself    was    undecided    whether    to    seize 
Prussian  Poland  and  revenge  himself  on  Prussia,  or  to 
pursue  the  French  into  Germany,  put  himself  at  the  head 


112          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

of  the  German  Patriots  and  pose  as  the  liberator  of 
Europe.  Luckily  for  Germany,  and  luckily  for  Europe, 
Stein  was  still  at  the  Czar's  side,  and  General  Yorck  was 
in  command  of  the  Prussian  auxiliaries.  On  30th  De- 
cember Yorck,  on  his  own  authority,  concluded  with 
Alexander  the  Convention  of  Tauroggen,  declaring  the 
neutrality  of  his  force.  Frederick  William  repudiated 
the  Convention  and  ordered  the  arrest  of  the  general. 
Yorck  was  undismayed :  "  With  bleeding  heart  I  burst 
the  bond  of  obedience,  and  carry  on  the  war  upon  my 
own  responsibility.  The  army  desires  war  with  France ; 
the  nation  desires  it ;  the  King  himself  desires  it,  but  his 
will  is  not  free.  The  army  must  make  his  will  free." 
It  did.  Stein  and  Yorck  virtually  assumed  the  reins 
of  government;  the  King's  hand  was  forced;  Prussia 
threw  in  her  lot  with  Russia ;  Alexander's  army  crossed 
the  Niemen  on  13th  January,  1813,  and  on  28th  Febru- 
ary the  Treaty  of  Kalisch  was  concluded.  This  treaty 
ratified  the  alliance  of  Russia  and  Prussia,  and  the  Czar 
promised  not  to  lay  down  arms  until  Prussia  was  restored, 
as  regards  area  and  population,  to  the  position  she  had 
enjoyed  before  Tilsit. 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  Stein  and  Yorck  had 
thus  laid  the  foundations  not  only  of  modern  Prussia,  but 
of  modern  Germany.  The  nation  was  called  to  arms 
against  France,  and  the  response,  though  long  delayed, 
was  not  uncertain. 

The  War        The  history  of  the  war  of  German  Liberation  falls  into 

LiSration  two  Peri°ds  :  (i)  ^rom  tne  Prussian  declaration  of  war  (17th 

March,  1813)  down  to  the  armistice  of  Plaswitz  (4th  June) ; 

and  (ii)  from  the  adhesion  of  Austria  (12th  August,  1813) 

to  the  entry  of  the  allies  into  Paris  (31st  March,  1814). 

During  the  first  period  it  was  a  popular  war  waged  on 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION    113 

the  principles  of  Stein  for  the  liberation  of  Germany  by 
Germans ;  in  the  second  the  adhesion  of  Austria  gave  to 
the  war,  and  still  more  to  the  settlement  which  crowned 
it,  a  dynastic  not  to  say  a  reactionary  character.  Stein 
and  Yorck  inspired  the  earlier  movement,  Metternich 
dominated  the  latter. 

Frederick  William  III.  formally  declared  war  on  the 
French  on  17th  March,  1813.  Napoleon  had  been  busily 
engaged  ever  since  his  return  to  France  in  raising  a  new 
army  of  350,000  men.  But  he  was  not  yet  ready  to  ad- 
vance ;  the  French  forces,  therefore,  fell  back  on  Magde- 
burg, and  before  the  end  of  April  the  Cossacks  and 
Prussians  had  occupied  Dresden ;  but  Napoleon  was  now 
at  hand,  and  on  2nd  May  drove  the  allies  from  their 
position  at  Liitzen,  forced  them  back  behind  the  Elbe, 
and  himself  occupied  Dresden  (14th  May).  A  week 
later  an  obstinately  contested  battle  was  fought  at  Baut- 
zen on  the  Spree  (20th,  21st  May).  The  allies,  though 
beaten,  fell  back  in  perfect  order  on  Silesia,  and  on  4th 
June  Napoleon  proposed  a  seven  weeks'  armistice.  He 
wanted  time  to  bring  up  the  army  of  Italy  into  Carniola 
in  order  to  intimidate  Austria  into  neutrality.  The 
armistice  was,  however,  as  Napoleon  subsequently  ad- 
mitted, a  fatal  blunder.  Austria  had  no  wish  to  exalt 
Russia  and  Prussia  at  the  expense  of  France,  but  on 
Napoleon's  refusal  of  her  proffered  mediation  she  con- 
cluded with  the  allies  the  Treaty  of  Reichenbach  (27th 
June),  by  which  she  agreed  to  join  the  allies  if  Napoleon 
refused  the  terms  proposed  by  her.  The  conditions  were 
that  Napoleon  should  retain  the  Presidency  of  the  Rhein- 
bund,  but  should  restore  the  Illyrian  provinces  to  Austria ; 
suppress  the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  and  surrender 
the  territory  taken  from  Prussia  at  Tilsit  and  from  North 
8 


114         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Germany  in  1810.     As  Napoleon  foolishly  neglected  to 
accept  the  terms  before  the  specified  day,  Austria  declared 
war  (12th  August),  and  the  second  period  of  the  War  of 
Liberation  began. 
Battles  of       Napoleon  was  now  at  Dresden  in  command  of  440,000 

Dresden  11-  1 1  1 i 

and Leipzic men ;  opposed  to  mm  were  three  great  armies:  the 
Austrians,  250,000  strong  under  Schwarzenberg  in  Bo- 
hemia ;  Bliicher  at  the  head  of  100,000  Russians  and 
Prussians  in  Silesia ;  and  a  similar  number  of  Russians, 
Prussians  and  Swedes  under  the  Crown  Prince  Bernadotte 
of  Sweden  in  North  Germany.  Besides  these,  the  allies 
had  300,000  men  in  reserve,  to  say  nothing  of  the  forces 
in  the  Peninsula  under  Wellington,  who  was  at  this 
moment  fighting  his  way  through  the  Pyrenees.  Na- 
poleon's vast  power  was  beginning  to  crumble.  He 
defeated,  indeed,  the  grand  army  of  Austria  at  Dresden 
(26th,  27th  August) ;  but  on  the  same  day  Bliicher  won  a 
victory  over  Macdonald  in  Silesia  ;  on  23rd  August  Ber- 
nadotte repulsed  the  advance  of  Oudinot  upon  Berlin, 
and  drove  him  back  upon  the  Elbe ;  and  on  6th  September 
Ney  was  routed  at  Dennewitz.  Napoleon's  plan  of  a  triple 
attack  was  thus  entirely  frustrated,  and  after  some  weeks 
of  fighting  the  allies  took  the  offensive  and  crossed  the 
Elbe  in  the  first  week  of  October.  There,  on  the  plain  of 
Leipzic,  the  final  issue  was  joined.  To  the  300,000  troops 
of  the  allies  Napoleon  could  oppose  only  170,000,  and  in 
the  great  battle  of  Leipzic — "  the  battle  of  the  nations  " — 
(16th-19th  October),  he  opposed  them  in  vain.  Leipzic  has 
been  described  as  "the  greatest  battle  in  all  authentic 
history,  the  culmination  of  all  the  military  effort  of  the 
Napoleonic  age"  (Fyffe).  Leipzic  smashed  the  military 
power  of  Napoleon;  he  lost  40,000  men,  killed  and 
wounded,  30,000  prisoners  and  260  guns.  The  victors 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION    115 

lost,  in  killed  and  wounded,  54,000.  A  fortnight  later 
(2nd  November)  Napoleon  and  the  remnant  of  his  great 
army  re-crossed  the  Rhine. 

In  Germany  his  power  collapsed  like  a  pack  of  cards. 
The  vassal-princes  of  the  Rhein-bund  hastened,  with 
the  exception  of  Saxony,  to  throw  in  their  lot  with 
the  allies;  fortress  after  fortress  surrendered:  Danzic, 
Dresden,  Stettin,  Liibeck,  Torgau  and  others;  King 
Jerome  fled  from  Westphalia,  and  the  princes,  deposed 
to  make  room  for  him,  were  restored :  Holland  was 
liberated,  and  William  of  Orange  was  recalled. 

But,  among  the  allies,  there  were  divided  counsels. 
Bliicher  wanted  to  push  on  at  once  across  the  Rhine,  but 
the  sovereigns,  under  the  influence  of  Austria,  decided 
(9th  November)  to  offer  terms  to  Napoleon.  It  is  difficult 
to  realise  that  even  after  Leipzic  Napoleon  might  have 
had  peace  on  terms  that  would  have  gladdened  the  heart 
of  Richelieu  or  Louis  XIV.  France  was  to  withdraw 
within  her  "  natural  frontiers  " — the  Rhine,  the  Alps  and 
the  Pyrenees;  Belgium,  the  Rhenish  Provinces  and 
Savoy  were  to  be  retained,  and  Napoleon  was  to  keep 
the  Crown.  But  Napoleon  hesitated  to  accept,  and  on  the 
1st  December  the  offer  was  withdrawn.  Austria  was 
still  anxious  not  to  push  matters  to  extremities,  but  at 
the  end  of  December  the  allies  entered  France,  400,000 
strong.  Bliicher  marched  straight  for  Paris;  the 
Austrians,  under  Schwarzenberg,  entered  France  by  the 
gap  of  Belfort :  Billow  came  south  from  Holland.  They 
were  to  concentrate  in  Champagne.  Napoleon  was  thus 
confronted  by  three  armies  each  larger  than  his  own,  but 
by  incomparable  strategy  and  taking  advantage  of  the 
Seine  and  its  tributaries  the  Marne  and  the  Aube,  and 
aided  not  a  little  by  the  dilatory  and  half-hearted  tactics 


116         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

of  Austria,  he  held  the  allies  at  bay  for  nine  weeks. 
Twice  he  might  have  had  peace  on  terms  which  would 
have  left  him  in  possession  of  the  throne  and  the  frontiers 
of  1791.  After  BKicher's  victory  at  La  Rothiere  (1st 
February),  a  Congress  was  opened  at  Chatillon  on  the 
upper  Seine  (5th-9th  February,  1814).  Caulaincourt  was 
entrusted  with  full  powers  on  behalf  of  France,  but 
hesitated  to  accept  the  frontiers  of  1791,  involving  the 
loss  of  Belgium,  of  the  Rhenish  Provinces  and  Savoy. 
Then  came  another  week's  fighting  (10th-14th  February), 
greatly  in  favour  of  Napoleon,  and  again  conferences 
at  Chatillon  (17th  February,  etc.).  Napoleon  now 
attempted,  by  private  negotiations  with  the  Emperor 
Francis,  to  get  the  terms  which  he  had  failed  to  accept  in 
November.  But  the  time  had  gone  by  for  them.  On  1st 
March  the  great  Powers — England,  Russia,  Austria  and 
Prussia — concluded  the  Treaty  of  Chaumont,  cementing  a 
twenty  years'  alliance,  and  mutually  pledging  themselves 
against  separate  negotiations :  each  Power  agreed  xto 
supply  150,000  men,  and  England  promised  a  subsidy  of 
five  million  sterling.  Ten  days  later  Bliicher  won  a 
great  victory  at  Laon,  and  Napoleon  left  open  the  road 
to  Paris.  Even  now  Napoleon  might  have  thrown  him- 
self on  the  communications  of  the  allies,  but  after  some 
fighting  in  the  suburbs,  the  capital  surrendered  on  30th 
March,  and  on  the  following  day  the  allies  entered  it  in 
triumph.  Napoleon  was  formally  deposed  by  the  Senate 
(2nd  April),  a  provisional  Government  was  set  up  under 
Talleyrand — the  most  astute  of  French  statesmen ;  and 
on  13th  April  Napoleon  was  compelled  to  accept  the 
Treaty  of  Fontainebleau. 

Napoleon  was  compelled  to  abdicate  and  to  renounce  all  rights 
on  France  for  himself  and  his  family.     In  return  he  was  to  have 


MOSCOW  CAMPAIGN  AND  WAR  OF  LIBERATION    117 

Elba  in  full  sovereignty  and  a  pension  of  two  million  francs  for 
himself;  the  Duchies  of  Parma,  Piacenza  and  Guastalla  for  the 
Empress  Marie  Louise  ;  and  pensions  of  two  and  a  half  millions  for 
members  of  his  family. 

The  allies  had  now  to  decide  the  fate  of  France  and  The  First 
of  Europe.  For  France  various  alternatives  were  sug- e  ol 
gested.  Napoleon  himself  was  impossible;  a  Regency 
under  the  Empress  was  favoured  by  the  Czar ;  Berna- 
dotte  was  proposed  as  king,  and  even  Eugene  Beauharnais ; 
but  at  length,  largely  on  the  advice  of  Talleyrand,  the 
principle  of  legitimacy  was  accepted,  and  the  Bourbons 
were  recalled.  Louis  XVIII.  re-entered  Paris  after  an 
absence  of  three  and  twenty  years  on  3rd  May,  and 
shortly  afterwards  accepted  a  Charter  which  guaranteed 
a  Parliamentary  Constitution  to  France.  On  14th  May 
another  Bourbon,  Ferdinand  VII,  was  restored  to  Madrid, 
and  on  the  24th  Pius  VII.,  released  from  imprisonment, 
made  a  solemn  re-entry  into  Rome.  About  the  same 
time  Victor  Emmanuel  was  restored  to  Turin. 

Meanwhile  the  allies  were  busy  arranging  terms  of 
peace  in  Paris,  and  on  30th  May  the  first  Treaty  of  Paris 
was  signed. 

France  was  treated  with  extraordinary  leniency,  not  to  say 
generosity.  She  was  restored  to  the  limits  of  1792,  with  the 
addition  of  a  slice  of  Savoy  and  strips  of  territory  on  the  Eastern 
frontier  and  the  confirmation  of  Avignon  ;  no  war  indemnity  was 
imposed,  and  France  was  not  even  required  to  disgorge  the  art 
treasures  (with  the  exception  of  the  Vienna  library  and  some 
trophies  from  Berlin)  stolen  from  nearly  every  capital  in  Europe. 
France  engaged  not  to  fortify  any  places  in  the  East  Indies,  or  to 
keep  any  military  force  there  except  for  police  purposes.  Eng- 
land restored  all  the  French  Colonies  taken  in  the  war,  except 
Tobago,  Santa  Lucia  and  the  He  de  France.  France  recognised 
the  independence  of  Switzerland,  the  Netherlands,  and  the  various 
German  and  Italian  States  so  long  controlled  by  Napoleon.  England 


118         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

extorted  from  France  a  promise  for  the  abolition  of  the  slave  trade, 
and,  in  addition  to  the  Colonies  mentioned  above,  retained  Malta, 
and  agreed  to  purchase  from  Holland  Cape  Colony,  already  (1806) 
acquired  by  conquest.  Other  outstanding  questions  (on  some  of 
which  private  agreement  had  already  been  reached  by  the  four 
leading  Powers)  were  referred  to  a  Congress  to  meet  at  Vienna  in 
two  months. 

A  criticism  of  the  settlement  thus  effected  may  more 
fitly  be  deferred  until  its  completion  in  1815. 

With  Napoleon  an  exile  in  Elba  ;  with  the  legitimate 
rulers  restored  to  France,  Spain,  Holland  and  Sardinia ; 
with  the  Pope  once  more  at  the  Vatican,  the  great 
monarchs  and  diplomatists  might  fairly  be  allowed  to 
take  breath  before  plunging  into  the  discussion  of  the 
difficult  problems  which  awaited  solution  at  Vienna. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE   CONGRESS   OF  VIENNA  AND  THE   SETTLEMENT   OF 

1815 

THE  HUNDRED  DAYS  AND  WATERLOO 

We  are  all  glad  that  the  Treaty  of  Vienna  has  been  torn  up  ;  but 
it  ought  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  it  was  in  its  origin,  partly  indeed 
a  counter-revolutionary  arrangement  of  the  despots,  but  partly  also 
a  military  arrangement  framed  not  without  necessity  to  secure 
Europe  against  the  cruel  rapacity  of  France. — GOLDWIN  SMITH. 

THE  greatest  of  all  European  Congresses  was  formally  Congress 
opened  at  Vienna  on  1st  November,  1814.  Inofvienna 
brilliance  of  personnel  and  in  magnitude  of  issues  there 
has  been  no  parallel  to  it  in  modern  history.  Of  mon- 
archs  there  were  present  no  less  than  six  :  the  Czar 
Alexander — a  curious  mixture  of  shrewdness  and  mysti- 
cism, of  ambition  and  magnanimity ;  Frederick  William 
III.  of  Prussia;  Francis  I.,  Emperor  now  only  of  Austria, 
and  the  Kings  of  Denmark,  Bavaria  and  Wiirtemberg. 
German  electors,  dukes  and  princes  were  there  in  crowds, 
while  among  the  diplomatists  the  most  influential  were 
Lord  Castlereagh  and  the  Duke  of  Wellington  from  Eng- 
land ;  Hardenberg  and  Von  Humboldt  from  Prussia ; 
Nesselrode  from  Russia ;  Prince  Metternich  from  Austria ; 
and  finally  Talleyrand,  who  with  great  adroitness  pro- 
cured admission  to  the  Congress  on  the  ground  that  the 
quarrel  of  the  Powers  had  been  not  with  France  but  with 

119 


120    THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

j  Napoleon.  All  the  States  of  Europe,  except  Turkey, 
were  represented.  The  task  before  the  Congress  was  to 
rebuild  the  European  States  system,  demolished  by  the 
wars  of  a  quarter  of  a  century.  Its  work  has  been 
severely  criticised,  nor  can  it  be  denied  that  many 
blunders  were  made,  that  little  foresight  was  shown, 
that  important  principles  were  ignored,  and  that  selfish 
interests  were  too  much  regarded.  Two  things  should, 
however,  be  remembered:  (i)  that  though  the  diplo- 
matists were  called  on  to  rebuild,  it  was  on  old  and  en- 
cumbered sites ;  and  (ii)  that  they  entered  upon  their 
task  with  their  hands  bound  by  several  recently  con- 
cluded treaties.  By  the  Treaty  of  Abo  (1812)  Norway 
had  been  promised  to  Sweden;  by  that  of  Kalisch 
(February,  1813)  Russia  had  undertaken  that  Prussia 
should  be  restored  to  a  position  equal  to  that  which  she 
occupied  before  Tilsit ;  by  that  of  Reichenbach  (June,  1813) 
it  had  been  agreed  by  Russia,  Austria  and  Prussia  that 
the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw  should  be  partitioned  among 
them ;  by  that  of  Toplitz  (September,  1813)  Austria  had 
been  promised  her  possessions  of  1805,  and  the  independ- 
ence of  the  Rhenish  confederates  had  been  guaranteed ; 
by  that  of  Ried  (October,  1813)  the  King  of  Bavaria  had 
received  a  pledge  that  he  should  retain  full  sovereign 
rights,  and  all  territory  acquired  through  Napoleon,  ex- 
cept the  Tyrol  and  the  Austrian  districts  on  the  Inn; 
while  Murat  had  received  a  promise  of  Naples  (llth 
January,  1814).  Moreover,  by  secret  agreements  made 
in  Paris  it  had  already  been  decided  that  Holland  should 
acquire  Belgium ;  that  Venetia  and  part  of  Lombardy 
should  go  to  Austria,  and  Genoa  to  Sardinia.  Thus  the 
hands  of  the  diplomatists  were  far  from  free. 

The  most  difficult  questions  still  to  be  decided  were  the 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815    121 

future  of  Poland ;  the  position  of  Saxony ;  the  settlement 
of  the  Rhine  frontier ;  and  the  Constitution  of  Germany. 
The  Czar  was  determined  to  have  Poland.  C'est  d  moi, 
he  said,  laying  his  hand  upon  Poland  on  the  outstretched 
map ;  and  it  was  difficult  to  resist  his  claim.  "  Avec 
600,000  hommes  on  ne  negocie  pas  beaucoup,"  as  one 
observed.  But  if  Poland  were  to  go  to  Russia,  Prussia 
must  get  compensation  elsewhere.  Shall  it  be  in  Saxony, 
or  on  the  Rhine,  or  both  ?  Is  conquered  France  to  be 
allowed  to  retain  Alsace  and  Lorraine  ?  Is  not  this  the 
opportunity  for  depriving  her  of  ill-gotten  gains  threaten- 
ing to  Germany  ?  And  as  to  Germany  itself :  is  the  old 
Empire  to  be  restored  ?  Can  a  new  Empire  be  evolved  ? 
Is  Austria  or  Prussia  to  dominate  it  ?  And  what  of  the 
minor  States.  How  are  the  pledges  of  Toplitz  and  Ried 
to  be  redeemed  ?  The  mere  statement  of  the  problems 
suggests  the  difficulties  of  solution,  and  it  was  soon  found 
that  the  Congress  tended  to  split  into  two  parties :  on 
the  one  side  Russia  and  Prussia ;  on  the  other,  Metter- 
nich,  Castlereagh  and  the  smaller  German  Princes,  while 
Talleyrand  was  ever  on  the  watch  to  utilise  the  dissensions 
of  the  allies  for  the  benefit  of  France;  and  Talleyrand 
did  not  watch  in  vain. 

The  quarrels  were  at  their  height,  and  war  between 
the  allies  seemed  a  not  remote  possibility,  when  news 
reached  Vienna  that  caused  all  thoughts  of  dissension  to 
be  laid  aside  and  the  bonds  of  alliance  to  be  drawn  closer 
than  ever. 

Tiring  of   his  contracted   sovereignty  Napoleon   had  Th 
escaped  from  Elba,  and  on  1st  March,  1815,  had  landed 
with  about    1,500   men   on   the   coast   of   France,   near 
Cannes.     From  Cannes  he  marched  straight  on  to  Paris : 
towns  opened  their  gates;  his  old  army — marshals  and 


122         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

privates  alike — flocked  to  his  standard ;  the  Bourbons  fled, 
and  on  30th  March,  amid  scenes  of  frantic  enthusiasm, 
Napoleon  entered  the  capital.  Once  more  the  Bourbon 
monarchy  collapsed.  The  reasons  are  not  far  to  seek. 
Louis  XVIII.  was  no  bigoted  adherent  of  the  old  regime, 
but,  easy  going  and  complacent,  he  allowed  power  to  fall 
into  the  hands  of  his  brother,  the  Count  of  Artois.  The 
Count  was  a  reactionary  fanatic,  and  surrounded  himself 
with  priests  and  Emigres  even  more  rabid  than  himself— 
men  who  were  determined  to  wipe  out  every  trace  of  the 
work  of  the  last  twenty-five  years.  They  forgot  that  in 
that  time  a  new  France  had  come  into  being,  a  France 
which  mocked  at  Fraternity,  which  had  never  known  the 
meaning  of  Liberty,  but  which  clung  passionately  to  the 
advantages  they  had  secured  under  the  name  of  Equality. 
Above  all,  the  restored  Bourbons  failed  to  win  the  affec- 
tion of  the  army,  and,  as  Wellington  wrote,  "the  King 
of  France  without  the  army  is  no  king  ".  The  accuracy 
of  Wellington's  observation  was  forcibly  demonstrated 
after  Napoleon's  return. 

The  manifesto  which  the  ex- Emperor  then  put  forth 
was  conceived  with  admirable  skill.  "  He  had  come,"  he 
declared,  "to  save  France  from  the  outrages  of  the  re- 
turning nobles ;  to  secure  to  the  peasant  the  possession 
of  his  land;  to  uphold  the  rights  won  in  1789,  against  a 
minority  which  sought  to  re-establish  the  privileges  of 
caste  and  the  feudal  burdens  of  the  last  century ;  France 
had  made  trial  of  the  Bourbons ;  it  had  done  well  to  do 
so,  but  the  experiment  had  failed  ;  the  Bourbon  monarchy 
had  proved  incapable  of  detaching  itself  from  its  worst 
supports,  the  priests  and  nobles ;  only  the  dynasty  which 
owed  its  throne  to  the  Revolution  could  maintain  the  social 
work  of  the  Revolution.  .  He  renounced  war  and 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815    123 

conquest  ...  he  would  govern  henceforth  as  a  constitu- 
tional sovereign  and  seek  to  bequeath  a  constitutional 
Crown  to  his  son." 

France  was  cajoled;  Europe  was  not.     Once  more  the  Waterloo 
allies  flew  to  arms;  before  Napoleon  had  reached  Paris Campalgn 
the  Treaty  of  Chaumont  was  definitely  renewed  ;  each  of 
the  four  great  Powers  was  to  furnish  150,000  men  and  to 
keep  them  in  the  field  "  until  Bonaparte  should  have  been 
rendered  incapable  of  stirring  up  further  trouble  ".     Most 
of  the  minor  Powers  gave  in  their  adherence  and  promised 
assistance  against  the  common  scourge. 

For  three  months  Napoleon  laboured  assiduously  to 
raise  and  equip  his  army ;  by  the  end  of  May  200,000 
men  were  ready  to  take  the  field,  and  on  12th  June 
Napoleon  himself  started  for  the  front.  The  troops  of 
the  allies  were  posted  on  a  line  extending  from  the 
Scheldt  to  the  Moselle.  Wellington  was  at  Brussels  at 
the  head  of  a  miscellaneous  force  of  105,000  men,  of  whom 
30,000  were  British.  His  line  extended  from  Ghent  to 
Mons.  Blucher  was  at  Namur  with  117,000  Prussians, 
their  line  extending  from  Charleroi  to  Liege.  Napoleon's 
plan  was  to  smash  in  the  centre  of  a  thin  line,  divide 
his  enemies,  defeat  them  in  detail  and  march  on  Brussels. 
On  14th  June  he  was  at  the  head  of  a  force  of  125,000 
men  concentrated  on  a  front  of  thirty-five  miles  on  the 
western  bank  of  the  Sambre ;  on  the  15th  he  crossed  the 
Belgian  frontier,  attacked  the  Prussian  right  at  Charleroi, 
and  by  that  night  was  in  possession  of  Charleroi  and 
the  bridges  over  the  Sambre.  Next  morning  (16th  June) 
Napoleon  himself  attacked  Blucher  at  Ligny,  and  ordered 
Ney  to  clear  Wellington  out  of  Quatre  Bras  and  then  to 
fall  upon  Bliicher's  right  flank  at  Ligny.  This  was  the 
first  crisis  of  the  campaign.  Ney  found  that  he  had 


124         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

more  than  enough  to  do  at  Quatre  Bras  and  never  got 
near  Bliicher.  On  the  contrary,  Wellington  beat  him  back 
with  losses  of  about  4,000  men  on  each  side.  Meanwhile 
at  Ligny  Napoleon  defeated  Bliicher,  but  by  no  means 
decisively.  The  Prussians  lost  20,000,  the  French  11,000, 
and  after  the  battle  Napoleon  lost  touch  of  his  enemy. 
This  was  the  second  critical  point :  for  Bliicher  instead 
of  retiring  on  Liege,  as  Napoleon  imagined,  wisely  made 
for  Wavre  in  order  to  keep  in  touch  with  his  English 
colleague.  Consequently  Grouchy,  despatched  in  pursuit 
of  Bliicher  with  30,000  men  never  found  him.  On  the  17th 
Napoleon,  making  an  unaccountably  late  start,  moved 
slowly  on  towards  Brussels,  and  on  the  18th  found  the 
Battle  of  road  blocked  by  Wellington  at  Waterloo.  On  that  his- 
toric field  Wellington  sustained  the  attack  for  five  hours 
(11-4)  alone.  But  his  tactics  were  based  on  the  as- 
sumption that  Bliicher  would  come  to  his  assistance ; 
about  four  o'clock  the  first  Prussians  came  up,  but  not 
until  six  or  later  was  their  help  effective.  By  that 
time  the  great  battle  was  all  but  won ;  the  Prussian 
cavalry  turned  a  defeat  into  a  rout.  Napoleon  lost 
30,000  men  and  all  his  guns;  Wellington  lost  13,000, 
and  the  Prussians  6,000.  But  the  great  war  was 
ended.  The  road  to  Paris  was  open,  and  on  7th  July  the. 
allied  army  for  the  second  time  entered  the  French 
capital. 

Napoleon  fled  from  Waterloo  to  Paris;  abdicated  in 
favour  of  his  son  (22nd  June),  and  made  his  way  to 
Rochefort  with  the  intent  to  escape  to  America.  But 
his  old  enemies  were  on  the  watch;  escape  was  im- 
possible, and  on  15th  July  he  surrendered  to  Admiral 
Hotham  of  H.M.S.  Bellerophon.  Brought  to  the  shores 
of  England,  but  never  permitted  to  touch  them,  Napoleon 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815    125 

was  deported  to  the  Island  of  St.  Helena,  and  there  died, 
a  prisoner,  in  1821. 

While  England  and  Prussia  had  been  disposing  of 
Napoleon  in  the  North,  Austria  had  been  dealing  with 
his  brother-in-law  Murat  in  South  Italy.  Murat,  despite 
the  guarantee  of  the  allies,  threw  in  his  lot  with  Napoleon, 
was  defeated  by  the  Austrians,  fled  to  France  and  later 
to  Corsica,  and  was  ultimately  captured  and  shot.  His 
action  untied  one  of  the  diplomatic  knots  and  rendered 
easy  the  restoration  of  the  Bourbons,  in  the  person 
of  King  Ferdinand,  to  the  throne  of  Naples. 

By  this  time  the  diplomatists  in   Paris  and  Vienna  second 
were  nearing  the  end  of  their  labours.     Louis  XVIII.  p^cge  of 
had  returned  to  Paris  on  9th  July,  but  France  had  got  to 
pay  for  her  recent  escapade.     Still  the  terms  imposed  upon 
her  were  extraordinarily  lenient. 

By  the  second  Treaty  of  Paris  (20th  November,  1815)  she  was 
compelled  to  give  up  most  of  Savoy  and  the  other  territorial 
acquisitions  of  1814  ;  to  disgorge  the  stolen  art  treasures ;  to  pay 
an  indemnity  of  700  million  francs,  and  to  leave  eighteen  of  the 
fortresses  on  her  northern  and  eastern  frontiers  in  the  occupation 
of  the  allies  for  five  years  as  a  pledge  of  good  behaviour. 

On  one  question  there  was  much  dispute  among  the 
allies.  Ought  France  to  be  left  in  possession  of  Alsace 
and  Lorraine,  filched  from  the  German  Empire  during  the 
last  two  centuries  ?  The  German  Powers — Hardenberg 
with  special  emphasis — urged  that  this  was  the  ap- 
propriate moment  for  restitution.  "  If,"  said  the  latter, 
<c  we  want  a  durable  and  safe  peace,  as  we  have  so  often 
announced  and  declared,  if  France  herself  sincerely  wants 
such  a  peace  with  her  neighbours,  she  must  give  back  to 
her  neighbours  the  line  of  defence  she  has  taken  from 
them ;  to  Germany  Alsace  and  the  fortifications  of  the 


126         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Netherlands,  the  Meuse,  Mosel  and  Saar.  Not  till  then 
will  France  find  herself  in  her  true  line  of  defence  with 
the  Vosges  and  her  double  line  of  fortresses  from  the 
Meuse  to  the  sea ;  and  not  till  then  will  France  remain 
quiet.  Let  us  not  lose  the  moment  so  favourable  to  the 
weal  both  of  Europe  and  France  which  now  offers  of 
establishing  a  durable  and  sure  peace.  ...  If  we  let  it 
slip,  streams  of  blood  will  flow  to  attain  this  object,  and 
the  cry  of  the  unhappy  victims  will  call  us  to  give  an 
account  of  our  conduct." 

Hardenberg's  foresight  was  more  than  justified  by  the 
events  of  1870.  But  1870  was  far  ahead.  The  immediate 
concern  of  the  allies  was  peace  and  stability;  with  a 
restless  and  embittered  France  there  would  be  neither. 
"  What  have  you  been  fighting  all  these  years  ? "  asked 
Wellington.  "  Not  France,  but  the  spirit  of  Revolution 
embodied  in  a  crusade.  You  want  to  re-establish  a  regular 
government  in  France  under  the  ancient  dynasty.  Are 
you  going  to  associate  their  restoration  with  the  loss  of 
provinces  so  precious  to  France  ? "  Wellington  prevailed 
against  Hardenberg,  and  for  half  a  century  Alsace  and 
Lorraine  remained  French.  The  argument  was  nicely 
balanced :  History  was  on  the  side  of  Hardenberg ;  Policy 
and  local  sentiment  on  that  of  the  Duke.  That  France 
had  used  the  provinces  for  offensive  purposes  against 
Germany  is  true ;  that  the  loss  of  them  would  have  pro- 
voked an  early  renewal  of  the  contest  is  probable. 

Meanwhile  the  Congress  at  Vienna  had  not  allowed 
itself  to  be  interrupted  by  the  Hundred  Days,  and  in 
June,  1815,  concluded  its  labours.  The  main  points  of 
the  great  settlement  which  it  effected  must  now  be 
summarised. 

The  Czar  Alexander,  as  we  have  seen,  came  to  Vienna 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815    127 

determined  to  restore  the  ancient  kingdom  of  the  Poles,  Results  of 
with  himself  as  king,  and  his  determination  bore  down  0f°Vwnna 
all  opposition.      Thus   the    Grand   Duchy   of    Warsaw 
passed  in  its  entirety,  except  Posen  and  Thorn,  to  Russia,  (i)  Russia 
who  also  acquired  Finland  from  the  Swedes. 

The  Duchy  of  Posen  with  Thorn  and  Danzig  went  to 
Prussia,  who  further  obtained — again  in  the  teeth  of  (it)  Prussia 
prolonged  and  bitter  opposition — the  northern  half  of 
Saxony,  Swedish  Pomerania,  and,  most  important  of  all, 
a  huge  province  on  both  sides  of  the  Rhine,  including  the 
Duchies  of  Westphalia,  Cleves  and  Berg,  the  secularised 
Bishop-Electorates  of  Koln,  Trier,  Aachen,  the  Bishopric 
of  Minister  and  strips  of  Limburg  and  Luxemburg.  Thus 
was  the  promise  of  Kalisch  fulfilled.  Poland  had  gone  to 
Russia;  Anspach  and  Bayreuth  to  Bavaria,  Hildesheim 
and  East  Friesland  to  Hanover.  But  Prussia  in  extent 
and  population  was  in  a  position  much  better  than  before 
Tilsit,  and  with  far  larger  possibilities.  1815  was  indeed 
the  turning-point  in  the  fortunes  both  of  Prussia  and 
Germany.  Prussia  was  forced,  almost  against  her  will, 
to  find  compensation  for  her  losses  in  the  East  by  ac- 
quisitions in  the  West.  The  population  she  lost  was 
mostly  Slav;  the  2,000,000  subjects  she  gained  were 
Germans.  Above  all,  by  the  acquisition  of  the  Rhine 
Province  she  was  compelled,  as  the  champion  of  Germany, 
to  confront  France. 

But  to  estimate  the  full  significance  of  these  changes  ^ 
they  must  be  considered  in  connection  with  the  simul- Austna 
taneous  changes  in  the  position  of  Austria.     For  the  last 
two  hundred  years  Austria  had   been  more  and  more 
neglecting  German  interests  and  devoting  herself  to  the 
consolidation  of  her  dynastic  interests  in  Hungary  and 
Italy.     In  1815  she  gladly  surrendered  the  Netherlands 


128         THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

(Belgium)  to  Holland  to  form  with  the  latter  a  great  bar- 
rier kingdom  under  the  House  of  Orange.  As  compensa- 
tion she  acquired  Venetia  and  Lombardy,  and  recovered 
the  Illyrian  Provinces,  Eastern  Galicia  (from  Russia),  and 
from  Bavaria  the  Tyrol,  Salzburg  and  the  Vorarlberg. 
Bavaria  in  turn  was  compensated  with  Bayreuth  and  Ans- 
pach  (from  Prussia),  and  the  Rhenish  Palatinate.  Hanover 
became  a  kingdom  with  some  small  accessions  of  terri- 
tory. Baden  and  Wurtemberg  remained  unchanged, 
(iv)  The  But  even  more  difficult  than  the  adjustment  of  the 
tionSoftU  territorial  claims  of  the  several  German  Princes  was  the 
Germany  settlement  of  the  constitutional  question  for  Germany  as 
a  whole.  On  this  point  there  was  great  diversity  of 
opinion,  due  on  the  one  side  to  the  inveterate  rivalry  of 
Austria  and  Prussia,  and  on  the  other  to  the  anxiety  of 
the  lesser  Princes  to  lose  none  of  the  sovereign  rights 
conferred  on  them  by  Napoleon.  Stein,  to  whom  the 
Liberation  of  Germany  was  so  largely  due,  originally 
favoured  the  division  of  Germany  into  two  great  Federal 
States,  under  Austria  and  Prussia  respectively ;  but  this 
was  strongly  resisted  by  Metternich,  who  objected  not 
less  firmly  to  a  revival  of  the  old  Empire.  Unless,  there- 
fore, Germany  was  to  be  split  up  into  numberless  inde- 
pendent States,  it  became  clear  that  some  form  of  federal 
union  would  have  to  be  evolved.  Prussia  hoped  to  make 
it  really  effective,  Austria  to  whittle  it  down,  and  Austria 
was  supported  by  the  smaller  States,  who  feared  that 
any  union  would  necessarily  curtail  their  independence. 
Eventually  an  exceedingly  loose  form  of  confederation 
was  established,  under  which  the  thirty-nine  Sovereign 
Princes  and  Free  Cities  formed  themselves  into  what  was 
little  more  than  a  perpetual  League,  under  the  name  of 
the  Germanic  "  Bund  ".  A  federal  diet  was  to  sit  at-Frank- 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815    129 

forfc-on-Main  under  the  presidency  of  Austria.  The 
several  States  agreed  to  defend  Germany  as  a  whole  and 
its  component  States  against  any  attack,  and  mutually 
to  guarantee  the  territories  of  all  members  of  the  Bund. 

It  was  further  agreed  that  in  every  State  representative 
institutions  should  be  established.  But  the  federal  tie 
was  of  the  weakest.  To  the  ardent  spirits  who  had  made 
the  War  of  Liberation  such  an  issue  was  a-bitter  disap- 
pointment. But  reactionary  as  was  the  attitude  of  the 
Sovereign  Princes,  seeds  had  been  sown  among  the  Ger- 
man peoples,  destined  to  yield  a  rich  harvest  in  the 
future.  Though  all  traces  of  the  Napoleonic  occupation 
were  carefully  erased  upon  the  map,  it  none  the  less  left 
an  indelible  impression  upon  Germany. 

The  settlement  of  Italy  presented  similar  features,  (v)  Italy 
There  also  an  attempt  was  made  to  erase  the  handiwork 
of  Napoleon,  and  with  the  same  temporary  success.  The 
Bourbon  King  Ferdinand  once  more  reigned  over  the 
Two  Sicilies ;  the  Pope  was  again  master  of  the  States  of 
the  Church ;  Austria,  as  we  have  seen,  carved  out  for 
herself  a  great  Lombardo-Venetian  Principality ;  the 
ex-Empress  Marie  Louise  was  installed  in  Parma,  and  • 
Austrian  cadets  in  Modena  and  Tuscany;  while  Victor 
Emmanuel  I.  was  restored  to  Piedmont  and  Savoy,  with 
the  important  addition  of  Genoa.  Once  again  the  dynastic 
principle  seemed  to  have  triumphed  over  the  national, 
and  the  outlook  for  the  future  was  dark.  But  the 
Napoleonic  unification  had  nevertheless  left  permanent 
results  behind. 

Switzerland,  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  the  Cantons  (vi) 
of  Valais,  Neuchatel  and  Geneva  (twenty-two   in  all),  f™dtzer- 
was  guaranteed  by  the  Powers  in  perpetual  neutrality. 

In   Northern   Europe   the   same   principles  reappear. 
9 


130         THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

(vii)  Norway,  torn  from  Denmark,  was  united  to  Sweden,  which 
Europe  lost  Finland  to  Russia  and  Western  Pomerania  to  Prussia. 
Belgium  was  united  to  Holland.  Belgians  and  Dutchmen 
were  opposed  in  race,  creed  and  historical  tradition,  and 
the  union  was  effected  purely  in  the  interests  of  the 
European  equilibrium. 

(viii)  Great  One  Power  remains  to  be  considered.  Great  Britain 
had  entered  upon  the  struggle  with  no  selfish  aim ;  she 
had  sustained  it  with  unequalled  pertinacity ;  but  in  the 
territorial  readjustments  at  Paris  and  Vienna  she  had 
little  interest.  She  struggled  hard  to  effect  a  stable 
settlement  on  equitable  lines;  she  was  anxious  that  a 
due  balance  of  power  should  be  maintained ;  she  used 
her  influence  for  the  abolition  of  the  slave  trade,  but  her 
acquisitions  in  Europe  were  confined  to  Heligoland  and 
Malta  and  the  protectorate  of  the  Ionian  Isles.  Her 
substantial  gains  were  farther  afield.  For  ten  years  she 
had  been  undisputed  mistress  of  the  sea,  and  the  colonial 
possessions  of  France,  Holland  and  Spain  were  entirely 
at  her  mercy,  and  mostly  in  her  grasp.  At  the  Peace 
she  retained  Trinidad  (from  Spain),  Mauritius,  Tobago 
and  S.  Lucia  (from  France),  and  Ceylon  (from  Holland). 
Cape  Colony,  originally  acquired  by  conquest  was  re- 
acquired  by  purchase  from  the  Dutch.  In  India  also 
the  British  dominions  were  largely  extended  in  the 
period  between  1789  and  1815.  The  war  with  the 
United  States  (1812-14),  into  which  we  were  driven 
by  the  fiscal  policy  of  Napoleon,  ended  in  the  mutual 
restoration  of  conquests  and  an  agreement  to  abolish  the 
slave  trade' (Peace  of  Ghent,  24th  December,  1814). 

Such  were  the  main  features  of  the  great  settlement  of 
1815.  Few  of  them  were  permanent :  many  were  quite 
temporary.  The  union  of  Sweden  and  Norway  lasted 


CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND  SETTLEMENT  OF  1815    131 

ninety  years ;  that  of  Holland  and  Belgium,  fifteen ;  the 
Rhine  frontier  had  to  be  readjusted  in  1870.  The  settle- 
ment ignored  the  nationality  principle  which  had  been 
evoked  by  the  Napoleonic  occupations  of  Germany  and 
Italy  and  by  the  attempted  conquest  of  Spain — a  principle 
destined  to  dominate  European  politics  during  the 
coming  century ;  it  marked  a  reversion  to  the  outworn 
ideas  of  the  eighteenth  century :  to  the  doctrine  of 
"  balance,"  and  the  supremacy  of  dynastic  interests ;  the 
cJock  was  set  back  by  the  re -partition  of  Italy  and  the 
ineffective  re-constitution  of  Germany.  All  this  is  true. 
None  the  less  the  Congress  of  Vienna  marks  not  merely 
the  close  of  an  old  epoch  but  the  beginning  of  a  new. 
The  devouring  ambition  of  Russia  is  conspicuous ;  an 
important  though  unconscious  step  is  taken  towards  the 
Prussianisation  of  Germany;  England's  true  sphere  of 
activity  is  seen  to  be  ultra-European ;  the  House  of 
Savoy  is  stimulated  by  the  acquisition  of  Genoa  towards 
the  fulfilment  of  its  Italian  mission;  the  solicitude  of 
England  for  the  fate  of  the  slaves  heralds  an  era  of 
humanitarian  legislation ;  the  phantasy  of  the  Holy  Alli- 
ance is  a  prelude  to  the  concert  of  Europe.  The  diploma- 
tists of  Vienna  may  have  been  exceptionally  selfish  and 
short-sighted,  but  twenty  years  of  revolution  and  up- 
heaval had  evoked  aspirations  and  intensified  forces 
which  no  statesman  could  control. 

To  trace  the  operation  of  those  forces  and  the  fulfil- 
ment of  those  aspirations  is  the  purpose  of  the  pages 
that  follow. 


CHAPTER  XII 

RESTORATION  AND  REACTION 
THE  HOLY  ALLIANCE 

It  is  verbiage.— METTBENICH,  on  the  Holy  Alliance. 

Govern-  I  ^  OR  twenty-five  years  Continental  Europe  had  been 
Congresses  •*•  a  Prey  to  revolution ;  f or  the  next  fifteen  it  was 
given  over  to  reaction.  That  reaction  has  been  frequently 
ascribed  to  the  dominant  influence  of  the  Czar  Alexander. 
During  the  second  occupation  of  Paris  the  Czar  drafted 
a  declaration  pledging  the  allied  rulers  to  regulate  their 
policy,  internal  and  external  alike,  by  the  principles 
of  the  Christian  religion.  To  this  "  Holy  Alliance  "  the 
Emperor  of  Austria  and  the  King  of  Prussia  formally 
adhered.  Metternich  declared  it  to  be  "  verbiage " ; 
Castlereagh  was  led  to  doubt  the  Czar's  sanity ;  Canning, 
with  more  reason,  to  question  his  sincerity.  But  if  the 
Holy  Alliance  was  the  dream  of  a  mystic,  the  Quadruple 
Treaty  (20th  November,  1815),  concluded  between  Austria, 
Russia,  Prussia  and  England,  was  a  substantial  diplomatic 
fact.  Based  upon  the  Treaty  of  Chaumont  it  provided 
for  a  twenty  years'  alliance,  to  be  cemented  and  main- 
tained by  periodical  meetings  between  the  sovereigns  or 
their  plenipotentiaries,  and  thus  inaugurated  a  system  of 
government  by  Congresses.  The  admission  of  France 
(1818)  converted  the  Quadruple  Alliance  into  the 

132 


RESTORATION  AND  REACTION  133 

"  Moral  Pentarchy  of  Europe,"  which  endured  until  it  was 
broken  up  after  1822,  by  the  masterful  independence  of 
Canning.  Its  aims  will  be  disclosed  in  connection  with 
the  Congresses  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  (1818),  Troppau  (1820), 
Laibach  (1821)  and  Verona  (1822). 

Until  1818  France  was  excluded  from  the  Committee  Th 
of  the  Great  Powers;  but  in  the  history  of  the  European 
reaction  it  is  France  which  must  first  claim  our  attention. 
Not  because  France  dominates  Europe,  as  she  had  done 
in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  but  because 
the  clearly  marked  "  periods  "  in  French  history  and  its 
outstanding  "  crises  "  afford  the  best  clue  to  the  bewilder- 
ing maze  of  continental  history  during  the  nineteenth 
century. 

Between  1815  and  1900  France  tried  five  distinct  con- 
stitutional experiments:  (i)  1815-30,  the  restored  Bour- 
bon monarchy  under  Louis  XVIII.  (1815-24)  and  Charles 
X.  (1824-30),  ending  in  the  "  July  "  Revolution  ;  (ii)  "  con- 
stitutional "  monarchy  under  the  House  of  Orleans  (1830- 
48),  ending  in  the  Revolution  of  1848 ;  (iii)  the  second 
Republic  (1848-52) ;  (iv)  the  second  Napoleonic  Empire 
(1852-70) ;  and  (v)  the  third  Republic  (1870).  But  it 
happens  that  the  French  Revolutions  of  1830,  of  1848 
and  1870  mark,  not  for  France  only  but  for  Europe  at 
large,  epochs  of  first-rate  importance.  Lucidity,  there- 
fore, compels  us  to  deal  first  with  France. 

Louis  XVIII.  was  at  the  time  of  his  first  restoration  an  Louis 
old  gentleman  of  fifty-nine  (b.  1755),  and  so  fat  and  gouty 
that  he  could  not  sit  a  horse.  Endowed  with  much 
more  common  sense  than  either  of  his  brothers  (Louis 
XVI.  and  the  Count  of  Artois),  he  realised  from  the 
outset  the  impossibility  of  reviving  the  prae-revolutionary 
regime.  He  talked  indeed  of  "  linking  again  the  chain 


134         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

of  tradition  which  had  been  broken  during  a  period  of 
nefarious  crimes,"  and  1814  was  to  him l  not  the  first  but 
the  nineteenth  year  of  his  reign.  But  he  frankly  ac- 
cepted the  social  work  of  the  Revolution,  and  issued  (4th 

The  Con-    June,  1814)  a  Charter  of  an  exceedingly  liberal  character. 

Charter*1  Under  this  Constitution  there  were  to  be  two  legislative 
chambers;  a  responsible  ministry  and  a  tolerably  wide 
franchise ;  the  Napoleonic  nobility  was  to  be  confirmed 
in  its  titles  and  placed  on  a  social  equality  with  the  old 
noblesse ;  the  Press  was  to  be  free,  and  though  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  was  to  be  established  there  was  to  be 
complete  religious  toleration.  Finally,  the  eligibility  of 
all  classes  for  employment  under  the  State  was  to  form 
part  of  the  public  law  of  France. 

Reaction  The  Charter  unquestionably  provided  a  fair  basis 
for  a  constitutional  regime;  but  unfortunately  the  first 
Chamber  elected  under  it  proved  violently  reactionary 
(Chambre  introuvable).  Marshal  Ney  was  shot;  7,000 
Bonapartists  were  imprisoned,  and  persecution  ensued  so 
fierce  as  to  earn  for  itself  the  name  of  the  "  White  Terror  ". 
Talleyrand  and  Fouche,  whose  tact  and  skill  had  done 
so  much  to  smooth  the  path  for  the  restoration,  were 
dismissed  (1815)  to  make  room  for  the  Due  de  Richelieu, 
who  though  an  Emigrd  was  not  an  " ultra".  In  1818 
Richelieu  won  a  distinct  diplomatic  triumph  by  inducing 
the  allies  at  the  Congress  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  to  admit 
France  to  the  "  Pentarchy  "  of  the  five  great  Powers  and 
to  shorten  the  period  of  foreign  occupation.  Aix-la- 
Chapelle  marked  in  fact  the  re-admission  of  France  to 
the  polite  society  of  Europe.  But  a  general  election  re- 
sulted in  the  return  of  a  moderate  liberal  majority,  and 

1  Cf.  Charles  II.  of  England. 


RESTORATION  AND  REACTION  135 

Richelieu  had  to  give  place  to  Decazes,  whose  programme 
was  "  to  royalise  France  and  to  nationalise  the  monarchy  ". 
The  principle  thus  enunciated  was  eminently  sound,  but 
unfortunately  the  murder  (1820)  of  the  Due  de  Berri, 
second  grandson  of  the  Count  of  Artois,  and  heir-pre- 
sumptive to  the  Crown,  led  to  another  and  more  prolonged 
royalist  reaction.  On  the  wave  of  this  reaction  Richelieu 
came  back  to  power.  But  for  the  "  ultras,"  who  were  now 
supreme,  Richelieu  himself  was  far  too  moderate,  and  he 
in  his  turn  had  to  give  way  to  Villele,  the  leader  of  the 
ultra-royalists  -and  clericalists.  Among  his  own  party 
Villele  won  much  prestige  by  his  success  in  restoring  by 
force  of  arms  the  despotic  Government  of  Ferdinand  VII. 
in  Spain.1 

The  death  of  Louis  XVIII.  (1824)  and  the  accession  of  Charles  x. 
the  Count  of  Artois  under  the  style  of  Charles  X.  gave  (1824~' 
a  further  impetus  to  the  reactionary  movement.  The 
new  King  had  posed,  ever  since  the  restoration,  as  the 
leader  of  the  extreme  Right.  Bigoted,  ignorant  and 
superstitious,  the  comrade  of  the  Emigres  and  the  tool 
of  the  Jesuits,  he  plunged  headlong  down  the  hill  of 
reaction.  The  Chamber  of  Deputies,  however,  was 
against  him,  and  for  a  while  checked  his  course.  An 
appeal  to  the  country  (1827)  served  only  to  increase  the 
"  moderate "  majority  and  to  turn  out  Villele  in  favour 
of  Martignac.  But  Martignac's  moderation  was  in  the 
eyes  of  the  King  and  his  friends  nothing  less  than 
treason  to  the  monarchy,  and  in  1829  he  was  dismissed 
to  make  way  for  Prince  Paul  de  Polignac,  Count  Labour- 
donnaie  and  Bourmont.  The  last,  nominated  to  the 
ministry  of  war,  was  notorious  as  a  deserter  from  the 
Bonapartist  cause  on  the  eve  of  Waterloo ;  and  all  three 

icy.  P.  137. 


136         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

were  known  to  be  reactionaries  of  the  most  violent  type, 
whose  appointment  was  taken  to  signify  war  to  the 
Charter  and  the  Constitution.  The  Chambers  were 
quick  to  realise  the  danger  and  to  take  up  the  challenge. 
The  lower  Chamber  was  consequently  dissolved.  The 
country,  deaf  to  the  allurement  of  a  successful  military 
expedition  which  added  Algiers  to  the  dominions  of 
France,  returned  an  increased  liberal  majority.  The 
King  and  Polignae  were  then  forced  to  play  their  last  card. 
The  Ordin-  Before  the  Chambers  met  they  issued  the  famous  Ordin- 
^Oioud  ances  of  St.  Cloud  (26th  July,  1830).  The  Ordinances 
were  nothing  less  than  a  royalist  coup  d'etat.  The 
Chambers  were  again  dissolved;  a  system  of  double 
election  was  devised ;  the  electoral  franchise  was  raised ; 
freedom  of  the  Press  was  abolished,  and  a  number  of 
"  ultras  "  were  nominated  to  the  Council  of  State.  France 
was  momentarily  stunned.  The  Press,  led  by  M.  Thiers 
a  young  journalist  who  had  lately  come  to  Paris,  was  the 
first  to  recover  from  the  stupor;  an  emphatic  protest 
was  entered  against  the  Ordinances,  and  the  nation  was 
called  upon  to  resist  the  Government.  On  27th  July 
Marshal  Marmont  was  entrusted  by  Polignae  with  the 
defence  of  the  capital :  barricades  hastily  erected  were 
quickly  demolished,  and  some  citizens  were  killed  or 
wounded  in  street  combats.  On  the  28th  the  mob  once 
more  surged  through  the  streets,  raised  the  tricolour,  and 
seized  the  Hotel  de  Ville.  On  the  29th  the  troops 
mutinied;  the  mob  burst  into  the  Louvre  and  the 
The  Tuileries,  and  by  nightfall  were  masters  of  the  capital. 

Before  the  next  morning  the  walls  of  Paris  were  placarded 
by  Thiers  with  a  proclamation  in  favour  of  Philip,  Duke 
of  Orleans,  the  son  of  Egalite  Orleans,  who  had  played 
an  unworthy  part  in  the  Kevolution  of  1789,  and  the 


RESTORATION  AND  REACTION  137 

shoddy  Revolution  of  July  was  virtually  achieved.  On 
the  31st,  Orleans,  on  the  invitation  of  the  Chambers, 
assumed  the  office  of  lieutenant-general  of  the  kingdom. 
Meanwhile  Charles  X.  had  retired  from  St.  Cloud  to 
Rambouillet;  there  he  announced  (2nd  August)  his 
abdication  in  favour  of  his  grandson  Henry,  Due  de 
Bordeaux,  better  known  as  the  Comte  de  Chambord. 
At  the  same  time  he  appointed  Orleans  lieutenant- 
general  and  regent,  and  bade  him  proclaim  "  Henry  V." 
But  the  concession  was  too  late,  or  Orleans  was  too  am- 
bitious. The  Crown  was  offered  to  Orleans  on  7th  August 
by  the  Chambers,  and  on  the  9th  he  was  proclaimed 
King  of  the  French,  under  the  style  of  Louis  Philippe. 
A  week  later  Charles  X.,  his  family  and  Court,  sailed  for 
England.1  Such  was  the  issue  of  the  "glorious  days  of 
July  " ;  thus  did  M.  Thiers  "  dispose  of  the  French  Crown 
by  a  handbill,  and  overthrow  the  dynasty  by  a  placard  ". 
The  discussion  of  the  significance  of  the  "  July  Revolu- 
tion," and  the  character  of  the  "  July  Monarchy  "  must  be 
reserved  for  a  later  chapter. 

It  is  time  to  turn  to  the  history  of  the  reaction  else- 
where. 

In  no  country  was  it  more  violent  than  in  Spain.     Of  Bourbon 
all  the  Spanish  Bourbons   Ferdinand  VII.  was  perhaps  Restoration 

A  A  •*•     in  opam 

the  most  contemptible ;  a  miserable  compound  of  bigotry, 
sensualism,  superstition  and  cruelty.  None  the  less  his 
restoration  in  1814  to  the  throne  of  his  father  was  hailed 
by  the  Spaniards  with  limitless  enthusiasm.  Ferdinand 
had  hardly  reached  Madrid  before  he  plunged  into  an 
"orgy  of  reaction".2  In  1812  the  Cortes  had  drawn  up  a 
Constitution  modelled  upon  the  French  Constitution  of 

1  He  resided  first  at  Lulworth  Castle,  afterwards  at  Holyrood, 
and  died  in  Austria  in  1836. 

2  Phillips. 


138         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

1791,  and  based  on  the  principle  of  the  sovereignty  of 
the  people.  The  power  of  the  Crown  was  reduced  to  a 
shadow,  and  the  Legislature  was  to  be  supreme.  But 
fantastic  and  extravagant  as  was  the  Constitution  of  1812 
it  might  have  formed,  in  the  hands  of  a  strong  and  wise 
ruler,  the  starting-point  of  a  constitutional  regime. 
Ferdinand  was  neither  strong  nor  wise.  He  revoked  the 
Constitution,  dissolved  the  Cortes,  restored  the  Inquisition, 
recalled  the  Jesuits,  reinstated  the  nobles  with  all  their 
oppressive  privileges,  gagged  the  Press,  let  loose  all  the 
forces  of  disorder,  and  relentlessly  persecuted  all  the  ad- 
herents of  the  Bonapartist  regime.  For  six  years  the 
royalist  terror  reigned  supreme.  But  even  for  Spain 
the  reaction  was  too  violent.  The  provinces  were  soon 
honeycombed  with  secret  societies,  largely  recruited  from 
the  army.  Isolated  insurrections  were  put  down  with 
barbarous  cruelty,  but  in  1820  the  flag  of  revolution  was 
unfurled  at  Cadiz,  and  Ferdinand,  as  feeble  as  he  was 
cruel,  made  abject  surrender.  The  Constitution  of  1812 
was  restored ;  a  single  Chamber  Legislature  was  entrusted 
with  supreme  authority;  the  executive  was  completely 
subordinated  to  it ;  the  authority  of  the  Crown  was  re- 
duced to  nullity;  a  radical  ministry  was  installed  in 
office ;  the  Holy  office  was  once  more  suppressed ;  the 
religious  houses  were  dissolved,  and  from  the  "  orgy  of 
reaction  "  Spain  plunged  with  characteristic  extravagance 
into  an  orgy  of  reform. 

But  in  the  years  immediately  succeeding  Waterloo 
no  country  could  be  permitted  to  regard  itself  as  an 
isolated  unit.  The  "moral  Pentarchy"  was  watching 
with  anxiety  the  development  of  events  in  Spain,  and 
the  more  so  as  the  revolutionary  contagion  spread  to 
Portugal  and  Italy. 


RESTORATION  AND  REACTION  139 

In  1807,  as  we  have  seen,1  the  Portuguese  royal  family  Portugal 
had  transferred  the  seat  of  government  to  Brazil.  After 
the  restoration,  the  former  regent,  now  John  VI,  de- 
clined to  return  to  Europe.  He  appointed  as  regent 
Lord  Beresford,  the  former  commander  of  the  English 
troops  in  Portugal,  and  proclaimed  the  union  of  the  ^' 
Portuguese  dominions  under  the  title  of  the  "  United 
Kingdom  of  Portugal,  Brazil  and  the  Algarves  ".  Portugal 
was  thus  virtually  reduced  to  a  position  of  a 'dependency 
of  Brazil.  The  position  was  not  relished  at  Lisbon,  where 
insurrection,  stimulated  by  Spain,  broke  out  (1820).  The 
regent  was  deposed,  and  < John  VI.  was  persuaded  to  re- 
turn reluctantly  to  Europe.  Dom  Pedro,  his  son,  was  left 
as  regent  in  Brazil,  and  was  instructed,  at  all  hazards,  to 
preserve  Brazil  to  the  House  of  Braganza ;  "  and  in  case 
of  any  unforeseen  circumstances  which  should  make 
the  union  of  Portugal  and  Brazil  impracticable  ...  to 
place  the  crown  upon  his  own  head".  The  unforeseen 
happened.  The  Brazilians,  in  1822,  declined  to  recognise 
the  orders  of  the  Cortes  any  longer,  declared  their 
country  independent,  and  proclaimed  Dom  Pedro  as  Con- 
stitutional Emperor.  In  Portugal  itself  the  political 
pendulum  swang  violently  from  side  to  side.  In  1821 
John  VI.  accepted  complacently  a  liberal  Constitution. 
Bat  in  1823,  underpressure  from  Spain,  from  his  Spanish 
Queen  and  his  second  son  Dom  Miguel,  the  King,  with 
equal  complacency,  accepted  a  reactionary  ministry. 

From  the  Peninsula  the  revolutionary  movement  spread  Italy 
to  Southern  Italy.     Between  Spain  and  the  Two  Sicilies 
there  were  the  closest  ties,  historical  and  dynastic,  but 
Ferdinand  I.  of  Naples  was  a  much  more  indolent  re- 
actionary than  his  Spanish  kinsman.     There  was,  how- 

'P.  89. 


140         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

ever,  quite  enough  reaction  to  provoke  active  discontent, 
particularly  in  the  army  and  among  the  members  of  an 
exceedingly  powerful  and  widespread  secret  society  known 
as  the  Carbonari  (Charcoal  burners) .  In  1820  discontent 
blazed  out  into  insurrection.  The  Spanish  Constitution  of 
1812  was  proclaimed,  and  King  Ferdinand  was  compelled 
to  declare  his  acceptance  of  the  Constitution  on  oath. 
But  Austria  was  now  supreme  in  Italy,  and  Prince 
Metternich  did  not  permit  the  puppet  princes,  whose 
strings  were  pulled  from  Vienna,  to  act  independently  of 
him.  King  Ferdinand,  therefore,  having  taken  the  oath 
to  the  Constitution  with  peculiar  solemnity,  wrote  to  the 
Emperor  of  Austria  to  protest  that  he  had  acted  under 
duress,  and  that  the  oath  was  consequently  null  and  void. 
Austria  was  only  too  glad  to  get  an  excuse  for  direct  in- 
terference in  Southern  Italy,  more  particularly  as  she 
was  able  to  act  on  a  mandate  from  the  Powers. 
The  For  some  time  past  the  Holy  Allies  had  been  regarding 

Congress  w^n  growing  uneasiness  the  insurrectionary  movements  in 
Southern  Europe,  and  in  October,  1820,  the  three  Eastern 
Powers  met  in  Conference  atyTroppau  in  Bohemia,  where 
Lord  Stewart  (Castlereagh's  brother)  watched  the  pro- 
ceedings on  behalf  of  England.  On  19th  November, 
1820,  Russia,  Austria  and  Prussia  issued  a  protocol  in 
which  the  doctrines  of  the  Holy  Alliance  were  set  forth 
with  startling  explicitness.  "  States  which  have  under- 
gone a  change  of  government  due  to  revolution,"  so  it 
ran, "  the  results  of  which  threaten  other  States,  ipso  facto, 
cease  to  be  members  of  the  European  Alliance,  and  re- 
main excluded  from  it  until  their  situation  gives  guar- 
antees for  legal  order  and  stability.  ...  If,  owing  to 
such  alterations,  immediate  danger  threatens  other  States, 
the  Powers  bind  themselves,  by  peaceful  means,  or  if 


EESTORATION  AND  REACTION  141 

need  be  by  arms,  to  bring  back  the  guilty  State  into  the 
bosom  of  the  Great  Alliance." 

France  expressed,  in  general  terms,  adherence  to  the  Great 
protocol,  but  Castlereagh  protested  that  the  principle  s 
forth  therein  was  "in  direct  repugnance  to  the  f unda- Alliance 
mental  laws  of  the  United  Kingdom  ".  From  Troppau 
the  Conference  adjourned  to  Laibach  in  Carniola  (January, 
1821),  and  at  Laibach  a  mandate  was  given  to  Austria 
to  send  80,000  men  to  Naples.  The  Austrians  marched, 
practically  without  resistance,  upon  Naples ;  vengeance 
was  exacted  from  all  who  had  taken  part  in  the  recent 
movement;  the  principles  of  legitimacy  were  triumph- 
antly reasserted,  and  a  system  of  government  was 
established  which  was  afterwards  described  (by  Mr. 
Gladstone)  "as  an  outrage  upon  religion,  upon  civilisa- 
tion, upon  humanity  and  upon  decency  ". 

Against  the  doctrines  proclaimed  at  Troppau  and  the 
policy  sanctioned  at  Laibach,  England,  by  the  mouth  of 
Castlereagh,  entered  an  emphatic  protest : — 

"  England  stands  pledged  to  uphold  the  territorial  ar- 
rangements established  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna.  The 
invasion  of  a  weaker  State  by  a  stronger  one  for  the 
purpose  of  conquest  would  demand  our  immediate  inter- 
ference. But  with  the  internal  affairs  of  each  separate 
State  we  have  nothing  to  do." 

Thus  it  was  Castlereagh  alone  who  prevented  the  general 
acceptance  of  the  doctrine  of  interference  which  the  Holy 
Allies  were  anxious  to  maintain. 

But  while  Austria  was  finding  congenial  occupation 
in  Naples,  and  in  Piedmont,  France,  under  Villele,  was 
itching  to  go  to  the  assistance  of  Bourbon  absolutism 
in  Spain.  The  Congress  which  in  1822  met  at  Vienna 
and  which  adjourned  to  Verona  in  October  was  more  than 


142         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

agreeable  to  the  project ;  but  before  the  formal  mandate 
was  given  to  France  an  event  of  European  significance 
ha"d  occurred. 

Canning  On  the  death  of  Lord  Castlereagh  (August,  1822)  the 
English  Foreign  Office  passed  into  the  control  of  George 
Canning.  In  principle  there  was  no  difference  between 
the  policy  of  Castlereagh  and  Canning ;  in  the  method  of 
asserting  the  principle  there  was  all  the  difference  in  the 
world.  By  the  mouth  of  Wellington,  who  went  as 
England's  representative  to  Verona,  Canning  bluntly  in- 
formed the  Powers  that  "  while  England  was  no  friend  to 
revolution,  she  did  emphatically  insist  on  the  right  of 
nations  to  set  up  for  themselves  whatever  form  of 
government  they  thought  best,  and  to  be  left  free  to 
manage  their  own  affairs,  so  long  as  they  left  other 
nations  to  manage  theirs."  France  had  already  seized 
the  excuse  of  an  outbreak  of  yellow  fever  in  Spain  to 
mass  an  army  of  100,000  men  on  the  frontier  for  the 
purpose  of  establishing  a  cordon  sanitaire.  Canning's 
protest  was  too  late  to  stop  the  intervention  of  the  French, 
who  in  April,  1823,  marched  an  army  into  Spain  under 
the  Due  d'Angouleme,  and  re-established  the  absolute 
authority  of  King  Ferdinand.  France  remained  in  mili- 
tary occupation  of  Spain  until  1827. 

The  But  though  powerless  to  avert  the  French  occupation 

Colonies     °^  °^  Spain,  Canning  was  determined  to  prevent  the  ex- 
tension of  French  interference  to  new  Spain. 

For  some  years  Spain  had  experienced  increasing 
difficulty  in  governing  her  South  American  colonies.  In 
1817  she  had  purchased  peace  with  the  United  States  by 
the  sale  of  Florida  to  the  States  for  five  million  dollars. 
But  the  improvement  thus  effected  in  her  general  situa- 
tion was  merely  temporary.  Meanwhile  the  trading 


RESTORATION  AND  REACTION  143 

interests  of  Great  Britain  suffered  severely  from  the  pre- 
vailing anarchy  in  South  America.  For  outrages  un- 
numbered upon  British  ships  no  redress  could  be  obtained 
from  Spain.  In  1823  Canning  appointed  Consuls  to  the 
Spanish  colonies  for  the  protection  of  British  trade,  and 
France  was  at  the  same  time  bluntly  informed  that 
though  Spain  might  subdue  her  revolted  colonies  if  she 
could,  no  other  Power  should  do  it  for  her.  Finally,  on 
the  1st  of  January,  1825,  the  Powers  were  informed  that 
Great  Britain  had  recognised  the  independence  of  Buenos 
Ayres,  Columbia  and  Mexico.  The  Powers  protested,  but 
nothing  came  of  the  protest,  and  Canning  held  on  his 
way,  heedless  of  the  Holy  Allies,  and  he  found  a  powerful 
ally  in  the  United  States.  On  2nd  December,  1823, 
President  Monroe  had  declared  "  that  any  interference  on 
the  part  of  the  Great  Powers  of  Europe  for  the  purpose 
of  oppressing  or  controlling  the  destiny  of  the  Spanish 
American  States,  which  had  declared  their  independence, 
would  be  dangerous  to  the  peace  and  safety  of  the  United 
States,  and  would  be  considered  as  the  manifestation  of 
an  unfriendly  disposition  towards  them  ".  Such  was  the 
origin  of  the  famous  "  Monroe  doctrine  ".  The  action  of 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States  was  decisive;  by 
1830  the  Spanish  Empire  in  South  America  had  ceased 
to  exist,  and  the  following  independent  republics  had 
come  into  being :  Mexico,  Guatemala,  Colombia  ( =  New 
Granada  and  Venezuela'),  Peru,  Chili,  Bolivia,  Paraguay 
and  Rio  de  la  Plata  or  Buenos  Ayres. 

Not  less  prompt  and  decisive  was  Canning's  action  in  Portugal 
regard  to  Portugal.     There,  as  in  Spain,  the  reactionary 
party,  led  by  Dom  Miguel,  looked  for  support  to  France, 
the  liberal  party  to  Great  Britain.     At  the  request  of  the 
latter  a  British  squadron  was  sent  to  the  Tagus  "  to  con- 


144         THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

firm  in  the  eyes  of  the  Portuguese  nation  the  strict  inti- 
macy and  goodwill  subsisting  between  the  two  Crowns  ". 
This  gave  Dom  Miguel  an  excuse,  and  early  in  1824  he 
effected  a  coup  d'etat  and  virtually  superseded  his  father, 
John  VI.  The  latter  escaped  on  board  an  English  man- 
of-war,  and  managed  to  reassert  his  authority.  In  1825 
Canning  routed  Dorn  Miguel  and  his  French  friends,  and 
at  the  same  time  effected  a  final  settlement  of  the  long- 
standing difficulty  between  Portugal  and  Brazil.  John 
VI.  was  induced  to  recognise  the  independence  of  Brazil 
under  the  sovereignty  of  his  son  Dom  Pedro,  though 
retaining  the  imperial  title  for  his  life-time.  But  in  1826 
John  VI.  died.  Once  more  factions  broke  out  in  Portugal ; 
Spain  and  France  were  keen  to  interfere  on  behalf  of  the 
reactionaries,  but  they  were  stopped  by  the  prompt  action 
of  Canning,  and,  thanks  to  him,  the  liberal  Constitution 
was  saved. 

But  decisive  as  was  the  influence  of  Canning  in  Western 
Europe  it  was  exerted  with  even  more  important  results 
in  the  East.  To  that  quarter  the  attention  of  the  Powers 
had  been  turned  since  1821  with  ever-increasing  anxiety ; 
for  the  Greek  Revolt  had  opened  a  new  chapter  in 
European  history.1 

1  In  this  and  the  following  chapter  I  have  made  free  use  of  a 
previous  work  of  my  own :  George  Canning  and  his  Times  (Murray, 
1903). 


UNIVERSITY 

OF 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  GREEK  WAB  OF  INDEPENDENCE  AND  THE  EASTERN 
QUESTION 

That  shifting,  intractable  and  interwoven  tangle  of  conflicting 
interests,  rival  peoples  and  antagonistic  faiths  that  is  veiled  under 
the  easy  name  of  the  Eastern  Question. — JOHN  MOBLEY. 

It  offers  in  detail  a  chequered  picture  of  patriotism  and  corrup- 
tion, desperate  valour  and  weak  irresolution,  honour  and  treachery, 
resistance  to  the  Turk  and  feud  one  with  another.  Its  records  are 
stained  with  many  acts  of  cruelty.  And  yet  who  can  doubt  that  it 
was  on  the  whole  a  noble  stroke,  struck  for  freedom  and  for  justice, 
by  a  people  who,  feeble  in  numbers  and  resources,  were  casting  off 
the  vile  slough  of  servitude,  who  derived  their  strength  from  right, 
and  whose  worst  acts  were  really  in  the  main  due  to  the  masters, 
who  had  saddled  them  not  only  with  a  cruel,  but  with  a  most  de- 
moralising yoke  ? — W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  on  the  Greek  Revolt. 

FOR  Europe  as  a  whole  the  Greek  insurrection  marks  The  Turks 
the  beginning  of   that  sheaf  of   problems  which 
we  know  as  "  The  Eastern  Question". 

In  one  sense  the  Eastern  Question  dates  from  the  time 
(1343-1453)  when  the  Ottoman  Turks  began  to  "  encamp  " 
in  the  midst  of  the  bundle  of  races  which  inhabit  the 
Balkan  peninsula.  Constantinople  fell  into  their  hands 
in  1453,  and  thenceforward,  for  about  two  centuries,  the 
Turk  was  the  terror  and  scourge  of  Christian  Europe. 
Then  the  problem  altered.  In  the  seventeenth  century, 
and  still  more  clearly  in  the  eighteenth,  the  power  of 
10  145 


146         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

the  Turks  exhibited  obvious  signs   of  decadence.     The 
Habsburgs  began   for  the  first  time  to  make  headway 
against  them  in  Hungary  and  Transylvania,  and  Russia 
Treaty  of    pushed  down  to  the  Black  Sea.     These  Powers— some- 
I774ar  J1>  times  singly  and  sometimes  in  combination — were  con- 
stantly at  war  with  Turkey  during  the  eighteenth  century. 

In  1774  Russia  dictated  to  the  Porte  the  decisive  Treaty  of 
Kutchuk-Kainardji,  by  which  (i)  Russia  obtained  for  the  first  time  a 
firm  grip  upon  the  Black  Sea,  by  the  acquisition  of  Azof,  and  the 
acknowledgment  of  her  right  to  free  commercial  navigation ;  (ii) 
Russia  secured  a  permanent  Embassy  at  Constantinople  and  certain 
rights  of  protection  in  regard  to  the  Greek  Church  in  Turkey ; 
and  (iii)  the  Principalities  of  Moldavia  and  Wallachia,  together  with 
the  islands  of  the  ^Egean,  were  handed  back  to  Turkey  only  on 
condition  of  "  better  Government  ". 

Russia's  rights  under  the  treaty  were  not  in  all  cases 
distinctly  defined,  but  henceforth  the  Czar  of  Russia  was, 
in  his  dual  capacity  as  Head  of  the  Slav  family  and 
Head  of  the  Greek  Church,  recognised  as  in  some  sort 
the  protector  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  peoples  subject 
to  the  Porte. 

Treaty  of  In  1783  Catherine  II.  annexed  the  Tartars  east  of  the 
Bucharest,  river  Boug,  and  in  1792  pushed  her  frontier  to  the 
Dniester.  By  the  Treaty  of  Tilsit  (1807)  Alexander  I. 
stipulated,  as  we  have  seen,  for  the  cession  to  Russia  of 
Moldavia  and  Wallachia.  This  great  prize  was  denied  to 
him,  but  by  the  Peace  of  Bucharest  (1812)  he  snatched 
Bessarabia  from  the  Turks,  and  secured  for  his  allies,  the 
Servians,  complete  control  over  the  administration  of 
their  domestic  concerns. 

So  far  the  advance  of  Russia  in  South-eastern  Europe 
had  not  excited  the  alarm  of  the  other  European  Powers. 
In  1791  the  younger  Pitt  attempted  to  convince  his 


RUSSIA'S  WESTERN  ADVANCE 


For  settlement  of  Poland 
in  IBIS,  see  Map  p. 
English   Miles 


fc.v.y.          Extent    at  accession  of  Peter  the  Great ; 

Acquisitions  from  Sweden  K££J  from  Poland  E^3  from  Turkey  fTTH} 


148         THE  REMAKING  OP  MODERN  EUROPE 

countrymen  that  they  had  a  vital  interest  in  the  Eastern 
Question ;  but  Great  Britain  refused  to  take  alarm,  and 
for  the  next  thirty  years  other  matters  claimed  her 
attention. 

The  Greek  When,  therefore,  in  1821  the  news  of  the  Greek  Re- 
Revolt  voit  reaped  the  Powers  assembled  in  Conference  at 
Laibach,  no  exceptional  significance  appeared  to  attach 
to  it.  It  was  no  more — and  no  less — an  international 
question  than  the  revolutionary  movements,  apparently 
similar  in  character  and  origin,  which  had  lately  broken 
out  in  Spain,  Portugal  and  Naples.  Castlereagh,  for 
instance,  regarded  it  simply  as  one  more  instance  of  the 
prevailing  "  organised  spirit  of  insurrection  ".  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  it  was  on  an  altogether  different  plane  of  im- 
portance. Not  only  was  it  destined  to  add  another 
nation  to  the  European  polity;  it  also  came  to  be  re- 
cognised, in  the  after  time,  as  the  real  opening  of  a  new 
chapter  in  European  history. 

Causes  of  To  all  appearance  the  Greek  Revolution  was  a  bolt  from 
Revotteek  the  blue-  In  reality  it  was  far  otherwise.  The  Greeks, 
though  blotted  out  as  a  nation  by  the  Turks,  had  never 
been  crushed  as  a  people.  Much  of  the  public  adminis- 
tration was  in  their  hands,  and  a  large  share  of  commerce 
and  wealth ;  they  manned  the  navy,  and  controlled  the 
finances.  In  the  islands  they  enjoyed  practical  autonomy, 
and  in  the  Morea  had  a  large  measure  of  it ;  the  Greek 
Church  was  a  strong  bond  of  union;  and,  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  there  had  come  an  intellectual  revival 
which  had  recalled  the  glories  of  ancient  Hellas.  Into 
a  soil  thus  prepared  the  French  Revolution  had  flung 
seed  broadcast,  and  in  1815  the  Philike  Hetaireia  was 
founded.  This  secret  society  quickly  enrolled  200,000 
members,  all  of  whom  looked  to  the  expulsion  of  the 


THE  GREEK  WAR  OF  INDEPENDENCE          149 

Moslems  and  the  restoration  of  the  Greek  Empire  at 
Constantinople. 

The  insurrection  began  in  March,  1821,  under  Prince  Hypsi- 
Alexander  Hypsilanti,  who  raised  his  standard  in  Moldavia  fSkng  in 
in  the  confident  expectation  that  Russia  would  back  him. Moldavia 
But  the  Czar  Alexander  was  not  only  the  ruler  of  Russia 
but  the  founder  of  the  Holy  Alliance.  '  He  frowned  upon 
the   enterprise,  and  by  June,   1821,  Hypsilanti's  rising 
had  collapsed. 

Far  different  was  the  measure  of  success  attained  by  Rising  in 
the  movement   in   the   Morea   and  the   islands   of   the  * 
^Egean.     The  Turks,  taken  unprepared,  were  beaten  all  islands 
along  the    line,   and   had   recourse   to    cruel  reprisals. 
The  Greek  Patriarch  was  murdered   in  Constantinople, 
and  a  wholesale  massacre  of  the  Christians  was  ordered 
in  Macedonia  and  Asia  Minor.     On  both  sides  the  struggle 
was  conducted  with  the  utmost  ferocity,  and  the  serious 
attention  of  the  Powers  was  inevitably  attracted  to  it. 

Moreover,  Russia  had  her  own  quarrel  with  the  Turk, 
and  although  the  Czar  always  regarded  the  Greeks  as 
rebels,  who  ought  to  be  left  to  their  fate,  it  was  difficult 
to  prevent  the  two  quarrels  in  which  the  Porte  was  in- 
volved reacting  on  each  other,  if  not  merging  into  one. 

England  also  became  keenly  interested  in  the  struggle. 
Lord  Byron  aroused  immense  enthusiasm  on  behalf  of 
the  Greeks,  and  in  1822  Lord  Castlereagh's  (London- 
derry's) death  opened  the  Foreign  Office  to  George  Can- 
ning. Canning  was  a  firm  friend  to  the  Greeks,  but  his 
main  cause  for  anxiety  was  lest  Russia  should  be  allowed 
to  exploit  the  Greek  insurrection  for  her  own  purposes. 
His  policy,  therefore,  was  to  induce  Turkey  to  come  to 
terms  with  the  Greeks  before  Bussia  got  a  chance  of 
interference. 


150         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

For  three  years    (1822-25)   the   Greeks,  despite    in- 
ternal feuds,   more   than  held   their  own   against   the 
Turks;  but  in  1824  a  fresh  complication  arose.      The 
Sultan  called  to  his  assistance  Ibrahim  Pasha,  the  son  of 
his   vassal,  Mehemet  Ali  of  Egypt.     Ibrahim  occupied 
Crete  in  1824,  and  in  1825  crossed  to  the  Morea,  where 
he  "  harried,  slaughtered  and  devastated  in  all  directions  ". 
The  rumour  ran  that  he  meant  to  carry  off  all  the  Greeks 
who  were  spared  by  his  ferocious  troops  into  bondage  in 
Egypt.     And  while  Ibrahim  devastated  the  Morea  the 
Turk  himself  was  steadily  gaining  ground.     Missolonghi, 
after  an   heroic  defence  of  a   year,  to   which   English 
volunteers  had  largely  contributed,  fell  in  1826,  and,  in 
1827,   despite  the  efforts    of    Lord    Cochrane,   General 
Church  and  others,  Athens  was  compelled  to  surrender. 
Alexander      The   Greek   cause   seemed   desperate.      But  in   1825 
succe     I  Alexander  of  Russia  had  died  and  been  succeeded  by  his 
Nicholas  I.  brother  Nicholas.     Nicholas  had  all  Alexander's  shrewd- 
ness and  ambition,  with  none  of  his  mysticism.     To  him 
it  mattered  nothing  whether  the  Greeks  were  rebels  so 
long  as  their  rebellion  subserved  Russian  interests.-   In 
1826,  however,  Canning  induced  the  new  Czar  to  combine 
with  England  to  force  an  armistice  on  the  Porte  and  to 
recognise  the  autonomy  of  Greece  under  Turkish  suzer- 
ainty.     The  ferocities   of  Ibrahim  had  "staggered  hu- 
manity," and  France  joined  England  and  Russia.    Turkey, 
however,  obstinate  as  usual,  ruined  Canning's  policy  and 
The  battle  plaved  straight  into  the  hands  of  Russia.     In  1827  the 
of Nava-     allied  fleets  were  sent  into  the  Levant  with  ambiguous 
October,     instructions.     The  Turks  fired  on  an  English  boat  in  the 

-I  QQ7\ 

harbour  of  Navarino ;  a  general  action  ensued,  and  the 
Turkish  fleet  was  entirely  destroyed.  The  battle  of 
Navarino  secured  the  liberation  of  Greece,  but  apart 


THE  GREEK  WAR  OF  INDEPENDENCE          151 

from  this,  all  the  advantages  of  the  joint  intervention 
were  reaped  exclusively  by  Russia.  Canning  died  in 
August,  1827,  and  the  fruits  of  his  firm  diplomacy  were 
dissipated  by  his  successors.  Wellington  deplored  Na- 
varino  as  an  "  untoward  event "  and  apologised  to  the 
Porte  for  the  accident.  The  Czar,  on  the  contrary, 
advanced  single  handed  against  the  Porte.  The  cam- 
paign of  1828  was  a  failure,  but  in  1829  Russia  put  forth 
her  strength ;  Diebitsch  crossed  the  Balkans,  occupied 
Adrianople  and  threatened  Constantinople;  Kars  and 
Erzeroum  had  already  fallen,  and  on  14th  September, 
1829,  the  Porte  accepted  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople — a 
treaty  second  only  in  importance  in  the  history  of  the 
Eastern  Question  to  that  of  Kainardji. 

Russia  restored  her  conquests,  except  the  "Great  Islands  "  of  Treaty  of 
the  Danube  ;  but  her  title  to  Georgia  and  the  other  provinces  of  Adrianople 
the  Caucasus  was  acknowledged  ;  all  neutral  vessels  were  to  have 
free  navigation  in  the  Black  Sea  and  on  the  Danube ;  practical 
autonomy  was    granted    to   the  principalities    of   Moldavia    and 
Wallachia  under  Russian  protection  ;   Russian  traders  in  Turkey 
were  to  be  under  the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  their  own  Consuls, 
and  in  regard  to  Greece  the  Porte  accepted  the  Treaty  of  London, 
thus  virtually  acknowledging  its  independence. 

The  final  settlement  of  Greece  was  referred  to  a  Confer- 
ence in  London  where  the  Greek  frontier  was  ultimately 
fixed  at  a  line  extending  from  the  Gulf  of  Volo  on  the 
East  to  Arta  on  the  West.  The  form  of  government  was 
to  be  a  Constitutional  Monarchy,  and  the  Crown,  having 
been  successively  declined  by  Prince  John  of  Saxony  and 
Prince  Leopold  of  Saxe-Coburg  (afterwards  King  of  the 
Belgians),  was  eventually  accepted  in  1832  by  Prince 
Otto  of  Bavaria.  Capodistrias,  who  had  been  ruling 
Greece  since  1827,  was  assassinated  in  1831,  and  the  way 


152         THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

was  clear,  therefore,  for  Prince  Ofcto.  But  Otto  was  not 
a  happy  choice ;  he  neglected  the  national  feelings,  and 
chafed  under  the  limitations  imposed  on  him  by  the 
Constitution.  An  abortive  revolution  broke  out  in  1843, 
and  a  more  successful  one  in  1862,  when  King  Otto  was 
expelled.  The  Greeks  were  anxious  for  a  king  from 
the  English  royal  family,  and  the  Crown  was  offered  to 
Prince  Alfred.  But  the  protecting  Powers,  England, 
France  and  Russia,  had  pledged  themselves  not  to  allow 
any  of  their  cadets  to  accept  the  throne,  and  in  1863 
England  obtained  for  the  Greeks  the  services  of  a  Danish 
prince,  and  at  the  same  time  presented  him  with  the 
Ionian  Isles.  King  George's  task  has  not  been  entirely 
easy,  but  under  him  Greece  has  madq^^Jkftpgress  on 
the  path  of  Constitutional  GV^^^H^H  mfter  many 
attempts  has  obtained  a  rccjjtffl  MB^^rf  rentier  by 
the  acquisition  of  Thessaly  sHIWRrip  of  Epirus  (1881). 

The  Duke  of  Wellington  declared  the  Treaty  of 
Adrianople  to  be  the  "  death-blow  to  the  independence 
of  the  Ottoman  Porte,  and  the  forerunner  of  the  dissolu- 
tion and  extinction  of  its  power".  The  Duke  under- 
rated the  recuperative  powers  of  the  "  sick  man  "  and  the 
cleverness  with  which  he  could  make  use  of  the  jealousies 
of  European  Powers.  The  Hellenic  rising,  issuing  in  a 
Greek  kingdom,  has  indeed  added  one  more  factor  to  the 
well-nigh  insoluble  problem  of  the  "  Eastern  Question," 
but  the  Turk  himself,  despite  loss  of  provinces  and 
curtailment  of  jurisdiction,  has  exhibited  unexpected 
vitality.1 

1  As  these  sheets  are  passing  through  the  Press  fresh  proof  of 
vitality  in  an  entirely  new  and  unexpected  form  has  been  given. 
By  a  bloodless  revolution  the  Turks  have  obtained  a  parliamentary 
constitution  (1908), 


CHAPTER  XIV 

FRANCE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852) 

The  English  have  a  scornful  insular  way 
Of  calling  the  French  light.     The  levity 

Is  in  the  judgment  only.  ... 

—MBS.  BROWNING. 

The  name  ofjjapoleon  is  in  itself  a  complete  programme.  It 
stands  for  offl  fcjBfctyjjeligipn ;  national  prosperity  within ; 
national  digni^l  BplPAPOLEON,  in  1849. 


T 


HE  July  Revolut^^Jfcugh  shoddy  in  character  The  July 
and  limited  in  its  immediate  scope,  exerted  con-R< 


siderable  influence  beyond  the  borders  of  France.  It 
definitely  closed  for  Europe  at  large  the  peribd  of  re- 
action inaugurated  at  Vienna.  Italy,  Portugal,  Switzer- 
land, and  several  of  the  German  States,  testify  to  the 
liberalising  impulse  derived  from  "  the  glorious  days  of 
July".  The  more  important  of  these  movements  will 
receive  attention  in  due  course.1  The  most  striking  and 
the  most  permanent  effect  was  traceable  in  the  kingdom 
of  the  Netherlands. 

The  Union  of  Belgium  and  Holland  under  the  House  Belgian 
of  Orange  was  one  of  the  most  characteristic  efforts  o 
the  Viennese  diplomatists.     Diplomacy  demanded  a  stout 
barrier  between  France  and  Germany,  and  cared  little 
how  it  was  constructed.     Between  Belgians  and  Dutch- 

1  See  pp.  177,  197  seqq. 
153 


154         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

men  there  was  little  in  common,  either  of  race,  creed  or 
tradition,  and  what  little  there  was  was  speedily  ob- 
scured by  the  stupidity  of  the  Hague  Government  after 
1815.  It  soon  became  obvious  that  the  Belgians,  though 
numerically  predominant,  were  to  be  converted  into  Dutch- 
men with  all  possible  speed.  Against  this  fusion  strong 
opposition  manifested  itself  in  Belgium.  The  clericals 
united  with  the  democrats,  and  both  found  encourage- 
ment and  opportunity  in  the  upheaval  of  1830.  Insur- 
rection broke  out  in  Brussels  in  August,  and  quickly 
spread  to  Liege,  Louvain  and  other  towns  in  the  Southern 
Netherlands.  The  King  offered  limited  concessions ;  the 
Belgians  demanded  Home  Rule,  and  both  parties  appealed 
to  the  Powers.  Russia,  Austria  and  Prussia  were 
strongly  opposed  to  the  destruction  of  their  handiwork, 
but  Lord  Palmerston  cordially  espoused  the  Belgian 
cause,  and  secured  the  assent  of  the  Pentarchy  to  the  in- 
dependence and  neutralisation  of  Belgium  under  European 
guarantee.  The  Belgians  themselves  created  a  difficulty 
by  the  election  of  the  Due  de  Nemours,  second  son  of 
Louis  Philippe,  as  king.  Palmerston  refused  to  permit 
such  an  extension  of  French  influence  and  Prince  Leopold 
of  Saxe-Coburg,  the  widowed  husband  of  the  English 
Princess  Charlotte,  was  elected  in  his  place 1  (June,  1831). 
Holland  was  then  coerced  into  submission  (1832)  by 
England  and  France.  Thus  Belgium,  largely  through 
the  determined  efforts  of  Lord  Palmerston,  came  into 
being  as  an  independent  kingdom. 

We  must  now  return  to  the  effects  of  the  July  Revolu- 
tion upon  France  itself. 
The  Citizen      From  the  outset  the  position  of  the  "  Citizen  "  King 

1  In  1832  King  Leopold  married  Princess  Louise,  eldest  daughter 
of  Louis  Philippe. 


FEANGE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852)  155 

was  one  of  great  embarrassment.  King  of  the  French 
neither  by  Divine  Right  nor  by  the  suffrages  of  the  people 
his  basis  of  authority  was  exceedingly  narrow.  The  Le- 
gitimists scowled  at  the  man  who  had  treacherously 
supplanted  the  Comte  de  Chambord,  and  legitimist  in- 
surrections broke  out  at  Lyons,  Grenoble  and  in  La 
Vendee.  The  republicans,  men  like  Lamartine  and 
Barrot,  were  equally  dissatisfied.  They  accepted  Louis 
Philippe,  but  only  in  the  hope  of  surrounding  the  "  Citizen 
Monarchy  "  with  republican  institutions.  Among  the 
mass  of  the  people  Louis  Philippe  and  his  bourgeois 
ministers,  Thiers  and  Guizot,  excited  no  enthusiasm.  The 
new  regime  was  constitutionally  respectable,  but  unheroic 
and  dull.  The  actual  form  of  the  constitution  underwent 
little  alteration  from  that  of  1814.  The  Chambers  ob- 
tained, concurrently  with  the  Crown,  the  right  of  initiat- 
ing legislation ;  the  members  of  the  Upper  House  were 
nominated  only  for  life,  but  the  supreme  question  of  the 
ultimate  responsibility  of  ministers  was  left  unsolved. 
Not  to  the  end  was  it  really  decided  whether  Louis 
Philippe  was  to  be  a  "  Constitutional "  sovereign  in  the 
English  or  in  the  Bourbon  sense.  Thiers  held  that  "  the 
King  reigns  but  does  not  govern " ;  but  Louis  Philippe 
himself  was  exceedingly  tenacious  of  the  control  of  the 
executive.  "They  shall  not,"  he  was  wont  to  say, 
"  prevent  my  driving  my  own  carriage." 

Neither  the  King  nor  his  ministers  drove  it  with  much  Foreign 
success,  either  at  home  or  abroad.     Nothing  indeed  did  Policy 
more  to  dissipate  the  small  measure  of  popularity  enjoyed 
by  the  Orleans  monarchy  than  the  ineffectiveness  of  its 
foreign  policy.     Starting  from  a  principle  of  non-inter- 
vention  Louis  Philippe  contrived  by  a  combination  of 
weakness  and  unscrupulousness  to  alienate  sympathy  at 


156         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

home    and    to    offend   his    best    friend    abroad — Great 
Britain. 

Egypt  The  first  rock  of  offence  was   in  regard  to   Egypt. 

France  had  long  regarded  herself  as  having  a  special 
interest  in  the  affairs  of  that  country.  In  1831  Mehemet 
AH,  the  ambitious  adventurer  who  had  become  Pasha  of 
Egypt,  attacked  and  conquered  Syria,  which  like  Egypt 
itself  was  under  Turkish  suzerainty.  The  Porte  ap- 
pealed to  the  Powers  for  help,  but  R-ussia  alone  was 
willing  to  afford  it.  France  and  England  compelled  the 
Sultan  to  buy  off  the  hostility  of  his  vassal  by  the  cession 
of  Syria  and  his  confirmation  in  Candia,  which  had  been 
Treaty  of  granted  to  him  as  the  price  of  assistance  in  the  Greek 
SkSessi  insurrection.  Russia  reaped  her  reward  in  the  Treaty  of 
1833  Unkiar  Skelessi,  which  secured  to  Russian  ships  of  war 
exclusive  rights  in  the  Black  Sea  and  the  Dardanelles, 
and  virtually  established  a  Russian  protectorate  over 
Turkey. 

In  1839  the  whole  question  was  once  more  reopened  by 
the  attempt  of  Turkey  to  recover  Syria  from  the  grasp 
of  her  Egyptian  vassal.  Mehemet  Ali,  backed  by  France, 
was  again  successful.  Constantinople  itself  was  threatened, 
and  again  the  Porte  was  compelled  to  appeal  for  the 
protection  of  the  Powers.  Lord  Palmerston  was  deter- 
mined that  come  what  might  Unkiar  Skelessi  should  not 
be  repeated.  With  France  dominant  in  Egypt  and  Russia 
supreme  at  Constantinople,  England's  position  in  the 
Eastern  Mediterranean  and  even  in  Asia  would  be  very 
seriously  compromised.  Consequently,  he  concluded  with 
Russia,  Austria  and  Prussia  the  Quadruple  Treaty  of  Lon- 
don (15th  July,  1840),  by  which  the  Powers  agreed  to 
coerce  Mehemet  Ali  into  submission  and  to  pacify  the 
Levant.  France  was  now  completely  isolated,  and  Louis 


FRANCE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852)  157 

Philippe  threatened  war  with  England.  Palmerston 
went  on  his  way  unheeding.  The  English  fleet  captured 
Beyrout,  Sidon  and  St.  Jean  D'Acre ;  France  was  informed 
"  in  the  most  friendly  and  inoffensive  manner  that  if  she 
threw  down  the  gauntlet,  England  would  not  refuse  to 
pick  it  up  ; "  Louis  Philippe  drew  back  ;  the  fiery  Thiers 
was  replaced  by  the  pacific  Guizot;  Mehemet  Ali 
was  deprived  of  Syria  and  Candia,  and  had  to  content 
himself  with  the  hereditary  pashalik  of  Egypt;  and, 
finally,  by  the  Treaty  of  London  (13th  July,  1841)  the  Treaty  of 
Dardanelles  were  closed,  under  the  guarantee  of  the  j™y°i84 
Pentarchy,  to  the  ships  of  war  of  all  nations.  The  latter 
stipulation  was  specially  significant,  and  marked  a  real 
triumph  for  Palmerston.  Unkiar  Skelessi  was  torn  up, 
and  the  Black  Sea  was  no  longer  a  Russian  lake.  For 
twelve  years  the  Eastern  Question  ceased  to  threaten  the 
peace  of  Europe. 

In  the  eyes  of  Frenchmen  the  Government  of  Louis 
Philippe  was  seriously  discredited  by  the  Egyptian  fiasco, 
nor  did  it  improve  its  position  by  its  intervention  in  the 
affairs  of  Switzerland  or  of  Spain. 

Between  1830  and  1848  Switzerland  was  in  a  condition  The 
of  perpetual  unrest,  and  in  1847  civil  war  broke  out. 
1845  the  Seven  Roman  Catholic  Cantons  had  formed  a 
Sonderbund  or  league  for  mutual  defence.  The  Republic 
was  threatened  with  disruption;  Austria  and  France 
backed  the  Sonderbund,  England  the  Protestant-liberals. 
The  active  intervention  of  France  was  averted  by  the 
tactics  of  Lord  Palmerston ;  the  Sonderbund  was  dis- 
solved, the  Jesuits  expelled,  and  unity  re-established 
(1848).  That  France  should  have  taken  part  with  Austria 
on  behalf  of  absolutism  and  ultramontanism  was  exceed- 
ingly distasteful  to  French  Liberals. 


158         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

The  Still  more  were  they  disgusted  by  the  treacherous  con- 

Marriages  duct  °^  Louis  Philippe  in  connection  with  the  Spanish 
marriages. 

The  question  of  providing  the  young  Queen  Isabella 
of  Spain  with  a  suitable  husband  had  been  for  some  time 
under  discussion  between  the  Courts  of  England  and 
France.  In  1843  and  1844  Queen  Victoria  and  Louis 
Philippe  exchanged  visits,  and  the  Queen  then  agreed 
to  the  engagement  of  the  Due  de  Montpensier,  younger 
son  of  Louis  Philippe,  to  Maria  Louisa,  younger  sister  of 
Queen  Isabella,  provided  that  the  marriage  should  not 
take  place  until  after  the  birth  of  an  heir  to  the  Spanish 
throne.  On  10th  October,  1846,  the  Spanish  Queen 
married  her  cousin,  the  Duke  Francis — a  man  notoriously 
unfit  for  marriage  and  therefore  acceptable  to  Louis 
Philippe.  On  the  same  day  Montpensier  was  married  to 
her  sister.  A  more  shameless  plot,  a  more  flagrant  vio- 
lation of  a  diplomatic  understanding,  it  would  be  im- 
possible to  conceive.  Its  authors  reaped  no  advantage. 
Embarrassments  were  multiplying  around  the  Citizen 
Monarchy.  Of  these  two  were  particularly  insistent. 
On  the  one  side  the  Liberals  were  demanding  parliamen- 
tary reform;  an  extension  of  the  franchise;  a  real 
parliamentary  executive,  and  above  all,  a  purification  of 
the  corrupt  administration.  On  the  other,  the  Parisian 
artisan  was  clamouring  for  a  recognition  of  the  right  to 
work  (droit  an  travail). 

Tbedroit  From  the  outset,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Orleans 
au  travail  Monarchy  had  rested  on  the  support  of  the  bourgeois ; 
nobles,  peasants  and  artisans  had  held,  for  the  most  part, 
sullenly  aloof.  Particularly  the  artisans.  In  France, 
as  in  England,  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century 
was  a  period  of  rapid  economic  change.  The  application 


FRANCE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852)  159 

of  steam  to  manufactures  revolutionised  industry;  the 
hand- worker  succumbed  before  the  competition  with  ma- 
chinery ;  the  factory  superseded  domestic  work,  and  even 
in  France  the  "self-sufficing"  household  tended  to  dis- 
appear. No  great  economic  revolution  can  be  effected 
without  suffering  to  the  poor;  statesmanship  may  miti- 
gate, it  cannot  avert  it.  In  England  the  fiscal  reforms  of 
Sir  Robert  Peel  knocked  the  bottom  out  of  the  Chartist 
movement ;  in  France  the  Socialists  sought  to  cure  econ- 
omic distress  by  effecting  a  political  revolution.  Socialism 
had  long  been  fashionable  in  Paris.  For  years  past  the 
salons  had  been  discussing  the  theories  of  Fourier  (1772- 
1837)  and  St.  Simon  (1760-1825),  and  many  fantastic 
but  short-lived  experiments  were  the  result.  But  these 
philosophers  preached  to  a  select  audience.  Louis 
Blanc  preached  to  the  masses,  and  from  him  the  French 
artisan  learnt  of  his  "right  to  work"  at  the  hands  of 
the  State.  It  was  this  doctrine  which  supplied  the 
driving  power  of  the  Revolution  of  1848,  and  which  was 
thus  responsible  for  the  overthrow  of  the  Orleans 
Monarchy. 

But  other  causes,  some  of  them  temporary  and  acci- Causes 
dental,  contributed  to  this  result.  devolution 

When  the  French  Chambers  met  in  December,  1847,  the  of  1848 
outlook  for  the  Government  was  gloomy.  Respectability 
was  outraged  by  the  Spanish  marriage  plot ;  Liberalism 
was  disgusted  by  Guizot's  gravitation  towards  Austria 
and  his  support  of  the  Sonderbund ;  and  from  different 
quarters  there  were  cries  for  electoral  reform ;  for  the 
purification  of  the  public  service ;  for  the  removal  of  the 
innumerable  "placemen"  who  gave  the  Government  a 
permanent  majority  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies;  above 
all  for  the  provision  of  State  employment.  The  im- 


160         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODEEN  EUROPE 

mediate  cause  of  the  outbreak  in  Paris  was  the  obstinate 
bungling  of  the  Guizot  ministry  in  regard  to  a  banquet 
which  the  Reformers  had  organised  for  22nd  February, 
to  advertise  and  promote  their  objects.  Interdicted  by 
the  Government,  it  was  abandoned  by  the  Reformers,  but 
on  the  same  day  Barrot  rose  in  the  Chamber  to  propose 
the  impeachment  of  the  ministry. 
The  In  Paris  the  temper  of  the  mob  was  rising  rapidly. 

Crowds  were  beginning  to  parade  the  streets ;  the  familiar 
barricades  were  erected,  only  to  be  demolished  by  the 
troops.  On  the  23rd  Guizot's  resignation  was  announced, 
together  with  an  intimation  that  the  formation  of  a  new 
ministry  had  been  entrusted  to  Count  Mole.  Mole  failed 
in  his  efforts,  and  Thiers  accepted  the  task  on  condition 
that  Odilon  Barrot,  the  leader  of  the  Extreme  Left,  might 
be  associated  with  him.  On  the  24th  the  new  ministry 
was  announced  and  a  dissolution  promised.  But  it  was 
too  late.  Not  even  Barrot  could  control  the  mob.  Several 
collisions  had  already  taken  place  between  the  troops  and 
the  people ;  the  corpses  of  fifty  victims  had  been  paraded 
through  the  streets;  the  National  Guard  had  mutinied, 
and  on  every  side  Barrot  was  received  with  cries  of  "  Vive 
la  Republique".  Before  nightfall  of  the  24th  Louis 
Philippe  abdicated  in  favour  of  his  grandson  the  Comte 
de  Paris,  and  appointed  as  regent  the  Duchess  of  Orleans. 
The  abdication  was  as  futile  as  it  was  faint-hearted,  and 
sealed  the  fate  of  the  dynasty.  The  King  and  Queen 
escaped  to  England ;  the  Duchess  of  Orleans  and  her  two 
sons  stood  their  ground  courageously  in  the  Chamber. 
But  the  Chamber  was  invaded  by  an  armed  mob;  the 
regency  and  the  dynasty  were  swept  aside,  and  a  Pro- 
visional Government,  consisting  of  Lamartine,  Ledru- 
Rollin,  Gamier- Pages  and  others,  was  appointed.  On 


FRANCE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852)  161 

the  same  evening  Lainartine,  speaking  from  the  Hotel 
de  Ville,  proclaimed  a  Republic. 

"In  France,"  said  Louis  Napoleon,  "we  make  revolu- 
tions but  not  reforms."  Never  was  the  profound  truth  of 
this  saying  more  signally  illustrated  than  in  1848.  By 
the  weakness  of  the  executive  and  the  excitability  of  the 
Parisian  mob  a  reform  movement  had  been  diverted  into 
Revolution.  It  was,  indeed,  "less  a  revolution  than  a 
collapse"  (Dickinson).  Even  down  to  February,  1848, 
there  was  nothing  in  the  nature  of  a  settled  design  to 
overthrow  the  bourgeois  monarchy,  though  France  was  • 
frankly  bored  by  it.  "La  France  s'ennuie."  Thus 
Lamartine  summarised  the  results  of  the  experiment 
which  closed  in  1848. 

But   despite  its   apparently  accidental  character  theSiguifie- 
Revolution  of  1848  had  a  real  significance.     Lamartine  Revolution 
might   vapour  about  the   old  catchwords   of  "  Liberty, of 
Fraternity  and  Equality  "  ;  but  it  was  not  to  assert  these 
principles  that  the  Parisian  artisan  took  off  his  coat.     To 
him  the  hero  of  the  Revolution  was  not  Lamartine  but 
Louis  Blanc ;  he  was  looking  not  for  a  mere  political  re- 
public but  for  a  socialist  millennium.     The  true  signifi- 
cance of  1848  is  disclosed  in  the  following  decree  (25th 
February) . 

"  The  Government  of  the  French  Republic  engages  to  The. 
guarantee  the  subsistence  of  the  workman  by  his  labour.  Workshops 
It   engages   to  guarantee   work   to   all   citizens."     The 
doctrines  of  the  Organisation  du  Travail  had  indeed 
come  home  to  roost.     To  fulfil  their  pledge  the  Govern- 
ment established  "  national  workshops,"  where  all  might 
obtain  work  at  fixed  wages.      Before  the  end  of  May 
there  were  115,000  applicants;  work  could  not  be  found 
for  them,  and  it  was  derisively  proposed  that  they  should 
11 


162         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

be  employed  to  bottle  off  the  Seine.  France  was 
threatened  with  industrial  ruin ;  the  Government  plucked 
up  courage  to  end  the  fantastic  experiment ;  the  Socialists 
revolted ;  a  state  of  siege  was  declared  in  Paris,  and  for 
four  days  (25th-28th  June)  a  sanguinary  conflict  raged  in 
its  streets.  The  Republic  vanquished  socialism,  but  de- 
stroyed itself. 

At  the  opportune  moment  a  new  actor  stepped  upon 
the  Parisian  stage. 

Prince  Prince  Louis  Bonaparte  was  the  third  son  of  Louis,  ex- 

Bonaparte  King  of  Holland.  Born  in  1808  he  was  educated  mainly 
in  Italy,  where  he  took  part  in  various  revolutionary 
movements.  In  1836  and  again  in  1840  he  attempted  to 
excite  the  French  people  to  revolt  against  the  Citizen 
King.  Condemned  in  1840  to  perpetual  imprisonment 
at  Ham  he  escaped  to  England  in  1846,  and  on  the  fall 
of  the  Orleans  Monarchy  he  offered  his  sword  and  his 
services  to  the  Republic.  Both  were  declined  and  he 
retired  to  England.  But  the  days  of  June  had  taught 
France  a  lesson.  In  September,  1848,  Prince  Louis  was 
elected  to  the  National  Assembly  by  five  departments. 
Returning  immediately  to  France  he  announced  himself 
(1st  December)  as  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  Under 
the  Constitution  of  1848  the  Government  was  vested  in  a 
President  and  a  single  legislative  Chamber,  each  elected 
Elected  on  the  basis  of  universal  suffrage.  This  gave  Louis 
President  Bonaparte  his  chance.  Out  of  7,000,000  votes  cast  in 
the  Presidential  election  less  than  2,000,000  went  to  the 
four  republican  candidates.  Lamartine,  the  republican 
leader,  got  19,900,  Bonaparte  5,500,000. 

"The  man  of  destiny"  had  arrived.  As  to  his  pre- 
destined mission  he  himself  entertained  no  doubt.  "I 
believe,"  he  had  declared,  "  that  from  time  to  time  men 


FRANCE  AND  HER  REVOLUTIONS  (1830-1852)  163 

are  created  whom  I  will  call  providential,  in  whose  hands 
the  destinies  of  their  country  are  placed.  I  believe  my- 
self to  be  one  of  those  men." 

From  the  moment  of  his  election  as  President  of  the 
Republic  Bonaparte  looked  steadily  towards  the  revival  of 
the  Empire.  He  appealed  to  all  classes,  more  particularly 
to  the  peasants,  to  the  priests  and  the  army.  Clericals  and 
soldiers  were  gratified  by  the  restoration  of  Pope  Pius  IX. 
and  the  overthrow  of  the  Roman  Republic  in  1849  ;  the 
peasants  were  attracted  by  the  magic  of  his  name.  The 
Assembly  also  played  into  his  hands.  With  the  fear  of 
February  and  the  terror  of  June  always  before  their 
eyes,  they  disfranchised  3,000,000  voters  and  muzzled 
the  Press  (31st  May,  1850).  The  President  could  now 
pose  as  the  champion  of  democracy  against  timid  re- 
actionaries. Frustrated  in  an  attempt  to  get  a  formal 
revision  of  the  Constitution  he  effected  with  consummate 
adroitness  the  famous  coup  d'ttat  of  2nd  December,  Coup 
1851.  The  leading  Republicans  and  Socialists  were  sud-  p 
denly  arrested ;  troops  were  posted  to  crush  resistance  in  1851 
Paris ;  the  Assembly  was  dissolved,  and  a  draft  Constitu- 
tion was  submitted  to  a  national  vote.  On  20th  December 
over  7,000,000  votes  were  given  in  favour  of  Bonaparte's 
scheme.  His  own  term  of  office  was  prolonged  for  ten 
years;  ministers  were  made  responsible  solely  to  the 
President ;  a  Council  of  State  nominated  by  him  was  to 
draft  laws  on  his  initiative,  and  legislation  was  to  be  in 
the  hands  of  a  nominated  Senate  and  an  elected  Corps 
Legislatif. 

A  second  plebiscite,  in  November,  pronounced  by  a  The  Second 
similar    majority   (7,824,129   against    253,149)   for  theEmpire 
transformation   of   the   Presidency   into    an   hereditary 
Empire,  and  on    2nd  December,  1852,  the  new  Emperor 


164         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

was  proclaimed  as  Napoleon  III.  In  January,  1853,  the 
Emperor  married  Eugenie,  Comtesse  de  Teba,  a  Spanish 
lady  of  great  beauty,  and  an  heir — the  Prince  Imperial 
— was  born  to  them  in  1856.  By  that  time  the  Second 
Empire  seemed  to  be  firmly  established  in  the  affections 
of  Frenchmen  and  in  the  regard  of  Europe.  But  already 
it  had  belied  its  initial  promise. 

L' Empire  cest  la  Paix.  So  Napoleon  had  declared 
in  1852.  Even  as  he  spoke  the  sky  was  darkening  with 
the  clouds  of  a  great  war — the  first  of  the  series  in  which 
the  Empire  was  destined  to  be  involved. 


CHAPTER  XV 

THE  CRIMEAN  WAR  AND  AFTER  (1852-1878) 

Tout  contribue  a  developper  entre  ces  deux  pays  Fantagonisme 
et  la  haine.  Les  Russes  ont  re§u  leur  foi  de  Byzance,  c'est  leur 
metropole,  et  les  Turcs  la  souillent  de  leur  presence.  Les  Turcs 
oppriment  les  coreligionnaires  des  Russes,  et  chaque  Russe  con- 
sidere  comme  uue  oeuvre  de  foi  la  delivrance  de  ses  freres.  Les 
passions  populaires  s'accordent  ici  avec  les  conseils  de  la  politique  : 
c'est  vers  la  mer  Noire,  vers  le  Danube,  vers  Constantinople  que 
les  souverains  Russes  sont  naturallement  portes  a  s'etendre  :  de- 
li vrer  et  conquerir  deviennent  pour  eux  synonymes.  Les  tsars  ont 
cette  rare  fortune  que  I'mstinct  national  soutient  leurs  calculs  d' 
ambition,  et  qu'ils  peuvent  retourner  centre  1'empire  Ottoman  ce 
fanatisme  religieux  qui  a  precipite'  les  Turcs  sur  1'Europe  et  rendait 
naguere  leurs  invasions  si  formidables. — SORBL. 


F 


OR  twelve  years  the  Eastern   Question   had  been  The  Holy 
permitted   to  slumber.     In  1852   it   was   rudely 


awakened  by  a  quarrel  about  the  Holy  Places  in  Palestine. 
It  had  long  been  the  custom  for  Christians  to  make 
pilgrimages  to  various  spots  in  Palestine  hallowed  by 
their  association  with  the  life  of  Christ  on  earth.  By  a 
treaty  of  1740  the  French  had  obtained  from  the  Porte 
the  right  of  guarding  several  of  these  Holy  Places ;  but 
in  the  latter  years  of  the  century  the  French  began  to 
neglect  their  duties  which  were  assumed  by  members  of 
the  Greek  Church.  In  1850  Louis  Bonaparte,  anxious 
to  conciliate  the  French  Clericals,  asserted  his  right  to 

165 


166         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

place  Latin  monks  again  in  possession.  The  demand, 
supported  by  Austria  and  other  Roman  Catholic  Powers, 
was  in  substance  conceded  by  the  Porte.  But  the  con- 
cession roused  the  anger  of  the  Czar  Nicholas,  the 
champion  of  the  Greek  Church,  the  more  so  as  it  was 
made  to  the  upstart  Emperor  of  the  French.  A  strong 
protest  was  lodged  at  Constantinople,  and  the  Czar  pre- 
pared to  utilise  the  situation  for  the  realisation  of  long- 
cherished  hopes. 

Nicholas  i.  He  was  sanguine  enough  to  suppose  that  he  could  carry 
En* land  England  with  him  in  his  schemes.  He  had  visited 
England  in  1844  and  had  attempted  to  persuade  the 
Government  that  the  dissolution  of  the  "  Sick  Man  "  was 
imminent,  and^hat  Russia  and  England  might  jointly 
provide  for  the  partition  of  the  inheritance.  Early  in 
1853  he  pressed  the  same  views  upon  Sir  Hamilton 
Seymour,  the  English  ambassador  at  St.  Petersburg. 
England  refused  to  regard  the  Turk  as  irremediably 
sick,  and  resented  the  offer  of  Egypt  made  to  her  by  the 
Czar. 

Wise  or  unwise,  right  or  wrong,  this  refusal  to 
come  to  terms  with  Russia  for  the  settlement  of  the 
Eastern  Question  was  fraught  with  momentous  con- 
sequences. It  may  be  held  immediately  responsible  for 
the  Crimean  War  and  ultimately  for  the  lasting  antago- 
nism between  England  and  Russia  in  the  Far  and  Farther 
East. 

The  dispute  as  to  the  Holy  Places  was  now  virtually 
settled  to  the  tolerable  satisfaction  of  both  France  and 
Russia ;  but  the  concessions  of  the  Porte  only  encouraged 
Russia  to  make  more  extensive  demands.  Under  threat 
of  war  the  Sultan  was  suddenly  required  to  grant  Russia 
a  formal  protectorate  over  all  his  Christian  subjects. 


THE  CKIMEAN  WAR  AND  AFTER  (1852-1878)     167 

On  the  advice  of  Lord  Stratford  de  Redcliffe  the  Porte 
refused,  and  in  June,  1853,  the  Russians  occupied  Mol- 
davia and  Wallachia.  In  October  the  Sultan  declared 
war,  and  at  the  end  of  November  the  Russian  fleet 
destroyed  the  Turkish  fleet  off  Sinope. 

England  and  France  were  watching  the  conduct  of 
Russia  with  rising  indignation.  After  the  massacre 
Sinope  their  allied  fleets  were  sent  into  the  Black  Sea, 
and,  despite  the  efforts  of  diplomacy  to  avert  it,  war  was 
declared  (27th  March,  1854). 

By  the  time  the  Anglo-French  army,  under  Lord  Raglan 
and  St.  Arnaud,  reached  Varna  the  Russians  had  evacuated 
the  Principalities.  The  allied  army  was  then  sent  to  the 
Crimea  with  orders  to  take  Sebastopol.  The  brilliant 
victory  of  the  Alma  (20th  September)  seemed  to  promise 
speedy  success,  but  Balaclava  (25th  October)  and  Inker- 
mann  (5th  November)  proved  such  stubborn  contests 
that  the  hope  was  dispelled,  and  Sebastopol,  fortified  by 
General  Todleben,  resisted  all  attacks.  Moreover,  on 
14th  November,  a  great  storm  dealt  destruction  to  the 
English  transports  outside  the  harbour  of  Balaclava. 
The  loss  of  stores  inflicted  terrible  sufferings  upon  the 
troops  during  the  severe  Crimean  winter  of  1854-55. 
Disease  followed  in  the  wake  of  scarcity.  The  ad- 
ministration completely  collapsed;  the  commissariat 
broke  down ;  the  wretched  hospitals  were  overcrowded, 
and  cholera  did  its  deadly  work  upon  half -starved  soldiers. 
With  the  turn  of  the  year  things  began  to  improve.  Miss 
Florence  Nightingale  and  her  devoted  band  of  ladies 
reorganised  the  hospitals;  in  January,  1855,  18,000 
Sardinian  troops  joined  the  allies  under  the  command 
of  La  Marmora ;  in  England  Lord  Palmerston  succeeded 
Lord  Aberdeen  as  Prime  Minister  and  infused  fresh 


168         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

vigour  into  the  military  administration,  and  in  March 
the  bellicose  Czar  Nicholas  succumbed  to  the  rigours  of 
the  winter,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Alexander  II. 
In  May  Marshal  Pellissier  succeeded  Canrobert  in  the 
command  of  the  French  troops,  and  on  the  28th  of  the 
following  month  Lord  Raglan,  who  had  stuck  manfully 
to  his  post,  died  from  cholera.  An  assault  upon  Sebasto- 
pol  had  been  repulsed  with  great  loss  on  18th  June,  but 
was  repeated  at  the  beginning  of  September.  The  capture 
of  the  Malakoff  by  the  French  troops  rendered  the  great 
fortress  untenable,  and  on  the  10th  it  was  evacuated. 
The  triumph  of  French  arms  satisfied  Napoleon  who  now 
became  anxious  for  peace.  The  capture  of  Kars  by 
Russia  (28th  November,  1855)  inclined  the  Czar  in  a 
similar  direction.  Austria  exerted  herself  to  arrange 

Treaty  of   terms  acceptable  to  all  parties,  and  on  30th  March,  1856, 

^s'        the  Peace  of  Paris  was  signed. 

The  Sultan  was  required  to  confirm  the  privileges  of  his  Christian 
subjects,  but  the  Powers,  including  Russia,  explicitly  repudiated 
any  right  of  interference,  individual  or  collective,  between  the  Sultan 
and  his  subjects  ;  the  Russian  protectorate  over  the  Danubian 
Principalities  was  abolished  ;  the  free  navigation  of  the  Danube  was 
established,  and  Russia  was  compelled  to  retire  from  its  shores,  by 
ceding  a  strip  of  Bessarabia  to  Roumania ;  finally,  the  Black  Sea 
was  neutralised,  no  vessels  of  war  were  to  enter  it,  and  no  arsenals 
were  to  be  established  on  its  shores. 

As  to  the  wisdom  of  the  Crimean  War  opinion  is  now 
sharply  divided ;  the  expenditure  of  blood  and  treasure 
was  enormous,  but  to  describe  it  as  objectless  and  fruit- 
less is  an  exaggeration.  For  good  or  evil  Russian  advance 
towards  Constantinople  had  been  at  least  temporarily 
checked ;  the  Sick  Man  had  been  set  on  his  legs  again, 
and  Russia's  claim  to  exclusive  control  of  the  Eastern 


THE  CRIMEAN  WAR  AND  AFTER  (1852-1878)     169 

Question  had  been  definitely  repudiated  by  the  Western 
Powers. 

For  the  next  twenty  years  the  Eastern  Question  did  The 
not  seriously  threaten  the  peace  of  Europe.  Nevertheless  Question, 
it  soon  became  obvious  that  the  many  problems  connected 18 
with  it  were  still  unsolved.  Among  the  various  popula- 
tions subject  to  the  Turk  in  the  Balkan  peninsula  there 
was  almost  perpetual  unrest.  In  1858  the  Powers  had 
decreed  that  Moldavia  and  Wallachia  should  remain 
separate  though  virtually  independent.  The  two  States 
ingeniously  elected  the  same  ruler,  Prince  Alexander 
Couza.  Europe  wisely  bowed  to  the  accomplished  fact, 
and  in  1859  recognised  the  union  of  the  Romanic  Princi- 
palities under  the  title  of  Roumania.  The  agitation  in 
Greece  has  been  already  referred  to.1  Crete  was  only 
kept  quiet  (1866-68)  by  the  intervention  of  the  Powers, 
and  in  1875  the  whole  Eastern  Question  was  again  re- 
opened by  the  outbreak  of  insurrection  among  the  peoples 
of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  who  were  supported  by  volun- 
teers from  Servia  and  Montenegro. 

Russia  was  only  too  glad  to  have  the  opportunity  of  insurrec. 
fishing  again  in  troubled  waters.     For  some  years 
the  Crimean  War  Alexander  II.,  an  enlightened  ruler,  had  1875 
busied  himself  with  domestic  reforms.    In  1861  he  carried 
through  the  Emancipation  of  the  Serfs,  converting  them 
into  peasant  proprietors  by  methods  similar  to  those  of 
Stein   and   Hardenberg.2      In  contrast  to  this  humane 
legislation  was  the  severity  with  which  the  insurrection 
of  the  Poles  was  subdued  in  1863.     It  was  not  long,  how- 
ever, before  it  became  plain  that  the  Czar  Alexander  did 
not  mean  to  accept  the  results  of  the  Crimean  War  as 
final.     In  1870,  taking  advantage  of  the  preoccupation 

aSeep.  152.  2Seep.  107. 


170         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

of  Europe  with  the  Franco-German  War,  he  denounced 
the  Treaty  of  Paris,  so  far  as  it  related  to  the  neutralisa- 
tion of  the  Black  Sea.  To  this  Europe,  after  some  demur 
from  England,  agreed  (18*71).  But  the  insurrection  of 
1875  gave  him  a  still  larger  opportunity. 

The  Porte  had  entirely  failed  in  its  promises  to  amelio- 
rate the  lot  of  its  Christian  subjects.  In  1875  the  Powers 
once  more  agreed  in  a  note,  prepared  by  Count  Andrassy 
of  Austria,  to  urge  reform  upon  the  Sultan.  The  Porte 
politely  agreed,  but  the  insurgents  refused  to  be  satisfied 
with  mere  assurances.  The  Berlin  Memorandum,  drafted 
early  in  1876,  proposed  a  time  limit,  but  Lord  Beacons- 
field,  deeming  that  famous  document  unjustifiably  dic- 
tatorial, refused  to  make  England  a  party  to  it,  and  it 
fell  to  the  ground. 

This   was   Russia's   opportunity :    the   whole   of    the 
Balkan  provinces  were  now  in  ferment.     The  Bulgarians 
tion  raised  the  standard  of  insurrection  in  May,  1876,  and  in 

June  Servia  and  Montenegro  declared  war  upon  the 
Porte.  The  Bulgarian  insurrection  was  stamped  out  in 
blood,  and  Servia  and  Montenegro,  despite  some  initial 
victories,  were  crushed  by  the  Ottoman  troops.  But  the 
atrocities  resorted  to  by  the  Turks  in  quelling  the  Bul- 
garian revolt  aroused  profound  indignation  in  England. 
Accordingly  in  December,  1876,  the  Powers  held  a  Con- 
ference in  Constantinople  in  the  hope  of  effecting  reform 
without  a  European  war.  The  Turk,  as  usual,  was  eager 
in  his  professions  of  reforms,  but  stubborn  in  his  refusal 
RUSSO-  to  allow  Europe  to  superintend  them.  Thereupon  the 

Czar   declared  war  (24th  APril>  187I7)>  and  was  j°ined 
by  Roumania.    The  Russians  crossed  the  Danube  in  June, 

but  the  Turks  held  out  with  splendid  courage  in  Plevna, 
and  not  until  10th  December,  1877,  were  the  Russians 


THE  CRIMEAN  WAR  AND  AFTER  (1852-1878)  171 

able  to  capture  that  great  fortress.  Before  the  end  of 
January,  1878,  they  reached  Adrianople,  and  in  February 
Constantinople  itself  was  threatened.  Kars  had  already 
fallen,  and  in  March,  1878,  Russia  dictated  to  the  Porte 
the  Treaty  of  San  Stephano  which  virtually  annihilated 
the  Ottoman  Power  in  Europe.  England  thereupon 
intervened,  and  demanded  that  the  Treaty  should  be 
submitted  to  a  European  Congress.  Russia  refused :  the 
English  fleet  passed  the  Dardanelles ;  the  reserves  were 
called  out,  and  a  large  Sepoy  force  was  despatched  from 
India  to  the  Mediterranean.  Russia  then  gave  way,  and 
in  June,  1878,  the  Powers  met  in  conference  at  Berlin.  Treaty  of 
In  July  a  treaty  was  concluded,  by  which — 

(i)  Servia,  Montenegro  and  Roumania  received  small  accessions 
of  territory  and  were  declared  independent  of  the  Porte  ;  (ii)  Bosnia 
and  Herzegovina  were  handed  over  to  Austrian  occupation — an  oc- 
cupation which  has  proved  to  be  permanent ;  (iii)  Russia  acquired 
Baton m  and  Kars,  and  recovered  the  strip  between  the  Pruth  and 
the  Danube  of  which  she  had  been  deprived  in  1856  ;  and  (iv)  Bul- 
garia, which  by  the  Treaty  of  San  Stephano  had  been  formed  into  a 
huge  State  stretching  from  the  Danube  to  the  ^Egean,  was  divided 
into  two  :  (a)  Bulgaria  proper,  which  was  to  be  an  independent 
State  under  Turkish  suzerainty,  and  (b)  Eastern  Roumelia,  which 
was  restored  to  the  Sultan,  who  agreed  to  place  it  under  a  Christian 
governor  approved  by  the  Powers. 

This  division  was  manifestly  artificial,  and  in  1885 
Prince  Alexander  of  Battenberg  united  Eastern  Roumelia 
to  Bulgaria.  The  Powers  protested,  Russia  with  special 
vehemence,  but  acquiesced,  and  in  1895  a  formal  recon- 
ciliation was  effected  between  Russia  and  the  new 
Bulgaria. 

Shortly  after  the  conclusion  of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  it 
was  announced  that  the  good  offices  of  England  had  been 
rewarded  by  the  cession  of  Cyprus. 


172         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

The  settlement  of  1878  was  regarded  at  the  time  as  a 
triumph  for  Great  Britain  and  a  distinct  check  to  Russia, 
and  Lord  Beaconsfield,  its  real  author,  reached  the  zenith 
of  a  dazzling,  though  transient,  popularity.  It  has  now 
become  the  fashion  to  assume  that  his  work  was  in  part 
fruitless  and  in  part  mischievous.  But  without  entering 
upon  debatable  ground  it  may  be  stated  with  confidence 
that  events  in  the  East  have  developed,  for  good  or  evil, 
on  lines  widely  divergent  from  those  laid  down  in  the 
Treaty  of  San  Stephano.  The  check  to  Russian  ambition 
administered  by  England  at  Berlin  may  have  served  to 
intensify  Anglo-Russian  rivalry  in  Asia,  but  it  un- 
doubtedly delayed,  if  it  did  not  avert  Russian  ascend- 
ancy at  Constantinople.  Between  the  Czar  and  the 
object  of  his  ambition  there  are  now  interposed  the  con- 
siderable barriers  of  Bulgaria  and  Roumania. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY  (1815-1849) 

Since  the  fall  of  the  Roman  Empire  (if  even  before  it)  there 
never  has  been  a  time  when  Italy  could  be  called  a  nation  any  more 
than  Europe  could  be  called  a  ship. — FORSYTE. 


W 


E  have  already  noted  the  intervention  of  Sardinia  The  Rise  of 

in  the  Crimean  War.  Remote  as  was  the  interest 
of  Sardinia  in  the  questions  at  issue,  that  intervention 
proved  to  be  the  turning-point  in  the  history  of  modern 
Italy.  It  convinced  Europe,  despite  the  recent  defeats 
at  Custozza  and  Novara,  that  the  Sardinians  could  fight, 
and  it  enabled  Cavour  to  claim  a  place  in  the  Congress 
of  Paris  as  the  representative  not  of  Sardinia  but  of 
Italy. 

In  order  to  appreciate  the  significance  of  these  state- 
ments a  long  retrospect  is  necessary.  I  have  hitherto,  of 
set  purpose,  omitted  all  but  the  barest  reference  to  events 
in  Italy,  and  in  Germany,  in  order  to  present  a  continuous 
narrative  of  the  two  most  striking  and  most  characteristic 
political  movements  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

Napoleon  I.  clearly  foresaw  the  destiny  in  store  for  Reaction 
Italy.  "  Italy,"  he  wrote,  "  is  one  sole  nation ;  the  unity 
of  customs,  of  language  and  literature,  will  in  some 
future,  more  or  less  remote,  unite  all  its  inhabitants  under 
one  Government.  .  .  .  Rome  is  the  capital  which  some 
day  the  Italians  will  select."  He  not  only  foresaw  it, 

173 


174         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

he  did  much  to  achieve  it.  He  created  an  Italian 
kingdom;  he  trampled  under  foot  the  prejudices  and 
jealousies  of  the  smaller  States;  he  built  bridges  and 
made  roads ;  he  unified  the  law  and  the  administration ; 
he  taught  the  Italians  to  fight. 

The  diplomatists  of  1815  did  what  they  could  to  obliter- 
ate all  traces  of  his  work,  and  so  far  as  territorial  re- 
partition was  concerned  they  succeeded.1  But  they  were 
powerless  to  erase  from  the  minds  of  the  Italian  patriots 
the  lessons  which  they  had  learnt  from  the  Napoleonic 
occupation.  As  Mazzini  himself  said  :  "  The  intellectual 
ferment,  the  increase  of  national  prosperity,  the  outburst 
of  fraternisation,  are  facts  irrevocably  committed  to 
history  ". 

Neapolitan  Nevertheless,  the  history  of  the  period  1815-30  is  one 
tionUIi820  °^  reaction  broken  only  by  sporadic  and  seemingly  fruit- 
less insurrections.  Of  all  the  petty  despots  restored  to 
the  Italian  thrones  in  1815  the  most  despicable  was  the 
Bourbon  Ferdinand  I.,  King  of  the  Two  Sicilies.  In  1815 
he  pledged  himself  to  respect  the  liberal  Constitution 
conferred  upon  Sicily  by  Lord  William  Bentinck  (1812). 
In  the  next  year  this  Constitution  was  torn  up  at  the 
bidding  of  Metternich.  In  1820,  as  we  have  seen,2  the 
revolutionary  fever  spread  from  Spain  to  Italy,  and 
Ferdinand  was  compelled  to  make  wholesale  concessions 
and  establish  the  "Spanish  Constitution".  But  the 
Holy  Alliance  intervened,  and  Austria  was  entrusted 
with  the  congenial  task  of  restoring  absolutism  in  Southern 
Italy.  In  1821  the  work  was  accomplished ;  "  order  "  once 
more  reigned  in  Naples,  and  for  the  brief  remainder  of 
his  reign  (ob.  1825)  Ferdinand  was  able  to  indulge  with- 
out restraint  his  insatiate  passion  for  political  persecution. 

1  See  p.  129.  2  P.  139. 


176         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

insurrec-  Meanwhile  insurrection  had  broken  out  in  North  Italy. 
North*  There,  as  in  the  South,  it  was  largely  the  work  of  the 
Italy  famous  secret  society,  the  Carbonari  (Charcoal  burners, 
1820).  But  though  the  Government  of  Victor  Emman- 
uel I.  had  proved  violently  reactionary,  the  insurrection 
which  broke  out  in  March,  1821,  was  anti-Austrian 
rather  than  anti -monarchical.  Joining  hands  with  the 
malcontents  of  Lombardy  the  Piedmontese  threatened 
the  Austrian  rear  as  the  latter  marched  to  restore  order 
in  Naples.  But  the  rising  was  wholly  profitless.  As 
soon  as  the  Austrians  had  done  their  work  in  the  South 
they  turned  northwards  and  crushed  the  revolt  at 
Novara  (9th  April,  1821).  Victor  Emmanuel  had 
abdicated,  on  the  first  sign  of  trouble,  in  favour  of  his 
Charles  brother,  Charles  Felix.  With  the  help  of  Metternich 
Sardinia  Charles  Felix  restored  absolutism  in  his  sub-alpine  king- 
dom; for  ten  years  (1821-30)  reaction  reigned  supreme, 
and  the  Austrian  yoke  was  riveted  more  firmly  than  ever 
on  her  Italian  provinces.  It  is,  however,  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  the  yoke,  though  bitterly  resented  by  the 
patriots,  was  universally  galling.  The  late  Duke  of 
Argyll,  strongly  inclined  as  he  was  towards  liberal 
opinions,  has  left  remarkable  testimony  on  this  point. 
"If  ever,"  he  wrote,  "the  dominion  of  one  race  over 
another  seemed  justified  by  at  least  material  prosperity, 
it  was  the  dominion  of  the  Austrian  Empire  over  its 
Italian  provinces  at  that  time  .  .  .  the  whole  face  of 
the  people  and  the  country  was  the  face  of  pleasantness 
and  peace."  l 

But  "  pleasantness  and  peace  "  had  to  be  purchased  at 
the  price  of  complete  abandonment  of  patriotic  aspira- 
tions. 

1  Autobiography,  i.,  p.  211. 


KEACTION  AND  KEVOLUT1ON  IN  ITALY  (1815-1849)    177 

It  is  death 

To  speak  the  very  name  of  Italy 
To  this  Italian  people. 

It  was  after  the  fiasco  of  1821  that  one  of  the  foremost  Mazzini 
of  Italian  liberators  first  began  to  interest  himself  in 
Italian  politics.  Born  in  Genoa  in  1805  Joseph  Mazzini 
resolved  while  still  a  youth  to  dedicate  his  life  to  the 
cause  of  Italian  liberation.  He  joined  the  Carbonari  soon 
after  he  left  the  University,  but  from  the  first  he  disliked 
both  their  aims  and  methods.  "  They  had  no  programme, 
no  faith,  no  lofty  ideals,"  and  he  determined  that  it 
should  be  his  mission  to  supply  the  lack.  His  opportunity 
came  with  the  Revolutions  of  1830.1 

The  "  July  Revolution  "  in  France  fanned  into  flame  the  insurrec- 
revolutionary  embers  in  Italy.  The  conflagration  centred  ^Os  of 
in  the  Papal  States,  where  Bologna,  Ancona  and  other 
towns  attempted  to  put  an  end  to  the  Temporal  dominion 
of  the  Pope.  Parma  and  Modena  followed  suit,  and  the 
Duchess  Marie  Louise  and  Duke  Francis  IV.  were  com- 
pelled to  flee.  They  joined  Gregory  XVI.  (elected  to  the 
Papal  chair  in  1831)  in  appealing  for  the  help  which 
Prince  Metternich  was  only  too  anxious  to  afford.  Once 
more  an  Austrian  army  marched  South.  Modena  was 
restored  to  Francis,  Parma  to  the  ex-Empress,  and  the 
Romagna  to  the  Pope.  Gregory  XVI.  promised  reforms, 
but  nothing  was  done,  and  as  soon  as  the  Austrians  France  and 
evac-.ated  the  Romagna  (July,  1831)  insurrection  broke 
out  afresh.  Once  more  the  Austrians  returned,  intending 
to  occupy  Ancona,  but  France,  growing  jealous  of  Austrian 
supremacy  in  Italy,  determined  to  anticipate  them.  In 
February,  1832,  a  French  force  occupied  Ancona,  and  for 

1  In  this  and  the  following  chapter  I  make  free  use  of  a  previous 
work  of  my  own  ;  Makers  of  Modern  Italy  (Macmillan  &  Co.). 
12 


178         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

six  years  (1832-38)  Austria  and  France  confronted  each 
other  in  the  Papal  States. 

Young  Italy  derived  no  advantage  from  their  rivalry,   but 

the  patriotic  movement  was  making  progress.  In  1830 
Mazzini  was  entrapped  by  a  Government  spy,  arrested, 
and  imprisoned  in  the  fortress  of  Savona.  Brought  to 
trial  after  six  months'  imprisonment  he  was  acquitted, 
but  was  expelled  from  Italy.  It  was  while  in  exile  at 
Marseilles  that  he  founded  (1831)  the  famous  Association 
of  Young  Italy.  This  association  was  to  take  the  place 
of  the  Carbonari ;  its  programme  was  definite  and  am- 
bitious. The  Austrians  were  to  be  expelled  ;  Italy  to  be 
liberated  and  unified;  and  a  reformed  Papacy  was  to 
assume  the  moral  leadership  of  the  world.  The  ultimate 
form  of  government  was  to  be  determined  by  the  people, 
though  a  Republic  was  to  be  commended  by  fair  argu- 
ment. Such  was  the  programme  of  Young  Italy,  and 
Mazzini  was  not  without  hope  of  its  immediate  if  partial 
realisation. 

Charles  In  1831  Charles  Felix  of  Sardinia  died,  and  was  suc- 
Piedmont  ceeded  by  his  cousin,  Charles  Albert.  A  Liberal  and  a 
Carbonaro,  great  things  were  hoped  from  him.  Mazzini  at 
once  addressed  to  the  King  an  eloquent  appeal,  beseech- 
ing him  to  lead  Italy  to  the  goal  of  liberty  and  unity. 
Charles  Albert  refused  to  respond  except  with  an  order 
that  Mazzini  should  be  arrested  if  he  attempted  to  return 
to  Italy.  But  though  the  Sardinian  King  frowned  upon 
it,  the  Young  Italy  movement  attracted  thousands  of 
ardent  spirits,  and  for  ten  years  the  hopes  of  the  patriots 
in  all  parts  of  Italy  were  focussed  upon  its  programme. 
The  attitude  of  Charles  Albert  was  a  bitter  disappoint- 
ment to  his  quondam  associates,  and  a  plot  was  formed 
for  his  assassination  in  which  Mazzini  was  unhappily  in- 


REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY  (1815-1849)    179 

volved.  An  unsuccessful  raid  upon  Savoy  (1834)  further 
contributed  to  damage  Mazzini's  reputation  among  moder- 
ate Liberals,  and  after  many  vicissitudes  he  found — like 
most  political  exiles — a  home  in  England  (1837). 

In  Italy  the  association  which  he  founded  did  splendid 
work  in  keeping  the  Italian  ideal  alive  during  a  period  of 
disillusionment  and  reaction.  Gradually,  however,  there 
emerged  other  parties  which,  with  similar  ends  in  view, 
sought  to  attain  them  by  more  moderate  means.  Of  these 
the  most  important  were  the  Neo-Guelphs  and  the  Pied- 
montese  Liberals. 

The  Neo-Guelphs,  led  by  Vincenzo  Gioberti,1  were  men  The  Neo- 
who  combined  devout  Catholicism  with  ardent  nation- Guelplls 
alism.  They  looked  to  the  Papacy,  purified  and  reformed, 
to  put  itself  at  the  head  of  the  Italian  movement.  In 
1846  they  believed  that  their  chance  had  come.  In  that 
year  Gregory  XVI.  died  and  was  succeeded  in  the  Papal 
chair  by  Pius  IX.  (Pio  Nono).  Pio  Nono,  a  genial,  kindly  pi0  Nono 
ecclesiastic  of  Liberal  inclinations,  began  his  reign  with 
promises  of  extensive  reforms.  Nowhere  in  Italy  were 
they  more  sorely  needed.  Corruption  was  rampant,  and 
abuses  of  every  kind  existed  in  the  extremest  forms. 
The  Neo-Guelphs  acclaimed  Pio  Nono  as  the  predestined 
saviour  and  liberator  of  his  country.  His  protest  against 
the  Austrian  occupation  of  Ferrara  raised  enthusiasm  to 
the  fever  height.  Mazzini  hailed  his  accession  as  fifteen 
years  ago  he  had  hailed  the  accession  of  Charles  Albert. 
Charles  Albert  himself  offered  to  place  his  sword  at  the 
service  of  the  Papacy,  if  war  with  Austria  ensued.  But 
the  Pope's  zeal  for  reform  soon  slackened.  A  measure  of 
freedom  to  the  Press  and  permission  for  the  enrolment  of  a 

1  His  work,  II  Primato  morale  e  civile  degli  Italiani,  was  published 
in  1843. 


180         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

national  militia  were  conceded,  but  little  more.  Tuscany 
and  Piedmont  followed  the  lead  of  the  Papacy,  and  Charles 
Albert  wrote :  "  If  Providence  sends  us  a  war  of  Italian 
independence  I  will  mount  my  horse  with  my  sons,  I 
will  place  myself  at  the  head  of  an  army  .  .  .  what  a 
glorious  day  it  will  be  in  which  we  can  raise  a  cry  for  the 
independence  of  Italy." 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  in  the  years  preceding  1848 
two  movements  were  making  progress  in  Italy  :  one  for 
domestic  reform  in  its  several  states ;  another  towards 
liberation,  if  not  towards  unification. 

The  In  1848  the   storm-cloud   burst.     A   Liberal   demon - 

crfei848tl0n  stration  in  Milan  (2nd  January)  gave  the  Austrians  the 
opportunity  of  firing  on  the  mob,  and  several  people  were 
killed.  These  "  proto-martyrs  of  Italian  independence,"  as 
they  were  somewhat  grandiloquently  called,  undoubtedly 
set  the  match  to  the  train  already  carefully  laid .  Insurrec- 
tions broke  out  in  Palermo  and  Naples,  and  Ferdinand  II. 
was  compelled  to  concede  a  "  Constitution  "  (29th  January). 
Duke  Leopold  of  Tuscany  followed  his  example  (Feb- 
ruary), and  in  March  Charles  Albert  called  a  Parliament 
at  Turin,  and  Pio  Nono  one  at  Rome.  But  the  news  of 
the  outbreak  of  Revolution  in  Vienna  (March)  aroused 
larger  hopes  in  Italy  than  any  which  could  be  satisfied 
by  domestic  reforms.  The  moment  had  surely  come  for 
striking  a  blow  at  the  Great  Power  by  whom  the  petty 
despotisms  in  Italy  had  been  so  long  maintained.  If 
Austria  were  driven  out  of  Italy,  the  people  could  deal 
with  domestic  tyrants.  Metternich  was  already  in  exile ; 
why  should  not  his  puppets  follow  him  ? 

War  In  the  spring  of  1848  these  hopes  seemed  likely  to  be 

Austria      rean'sed.     The  Milanese  rose,  drove  out  the  Austrians  and 

established  a  Republic.     Venice,  under  Daniel  Manin,  did 


REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY  (1815-1849)    181 

the  same.  The  rulers  of  Parma  and  Modena,  scared  by 
the  fate  of  Metternich,  took  flight.  Charles  Albert  of 
Sardinia  put  himself  at  the  head  of  the  national  move- 
ment and  declared  war  on  Austria.  The  Duke  of  Tuscany 
joined  him,  and  the  peoples  of  Parma,  Modena  and  Lom- 
bardy  (Milan)  united  themselves  by  plebiscite  with  the 
Sardinian  kingdom.  Already  it  seemed  as  though  the 
dreams  of  the  patriots  had  been  fulfilled ;  the  foreigner 
was  expelled ;  North  Italy  was  united  under  the  House 
of  Savoy.  But  the  success  was  too  rapid ;  Austria  was 
tocTstrong.  The  veteran  Radetsky  inflicted  a  crushing 
defeat  on  Charles  Albert  at  Custozza  (24th  July,  1848), 
arid  again  at  Novara  (23rd  March,  1849).  After  the  Charles 
battle  of  Novara,  Charles  Albert  abdicated  in  favour  of  succe<Lded 
his  son  Victor  Emmanuel  and  a  few  months  later  died  ^g'^JJuei 
Oporto.  The  victory  of  Austria  in  the  North  emboldened 
the  puppet  princes  to  creep  back  to  their  thrones,  but 
not  until  25th  August  did  the  Venetians,  spurred  to  the 
most  heroic  efforts  by 'Daniel  Manin,  finally  surrender. 

Stirring  events  had,  in  the  meantime,  been  taking  The 
place  in  Rome.1  The  pace  had  become  too  fast  for  ]Pio  Republic 
Nono.  He  had  refused  to  join  the  movement  against 
Austria,  but  had  put  Count  Rossi — a  reforming  minister — 
in  power.  In  November  Rossi  was  murdered,  and  the 
Pope  fled  to  Gaeta.  In  February,  1849,  a  Republic  was 
proclaimed,  and  three  triumvirs — among  them  Mazzini — 
were  appointed  to  carry  on  the  Government.  But  the 
Roman  Republic  of  1849  was  merely  a  splendid  episode. 
Louis  Napoleon,  anxious  to  conciliate  the  Clericals,  sent  an 
army  to  Rome  to  restore  the  Pope.  Under  Garibaldi  the 
Romans  fought  bravely  but  in  vain  ;  Garibaldi  himself 

1  Cf.  G.  M.  Trevelyan's  brilliant  monograph  Garibaldi's  Defence  of 
the  Roman  Republic. 


182         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

had  to  fly,  the  Republic  collapsed  and  the  Temporal  power 
was  restored.  With  French  influence  dominant  in  Rome, 
with  the  Austrians  re-established  in  the  North  and  Bomba 
(Ferdinand  II.)  in  the  South,  reaction  once  more  reigned 
supreme.  Nevertheless,  the  "year  of  Revolution"  left 
permanent  results  on  Italy.  From  the  Alps  to  Cape 
Passaro  there  was  not  a  State  which  had  not  felt  the 
breath  of  liberty ;  Austrian  supremacy,  though  ultimately 
restored,  had  been  rudely  shaken ;  the  hopes  of  the  Neo- 
Guelphs  had  been  shattered.  Above  all,  patriots  of  all 
parties  had  learnt  to  concentrate  their  hopes  upon  the 
House  of  Savoy  and  look  to  the  establishment  of  a 
Sardinian  hegemony.  Thus  Gioberti  himself  in  the 
Rinnovamento  (1851)  declared :  "  Except  the  young 
sovereign  who  rules  Piedmont,  I  see  no  one  in  Italy 
who  can  undertake  our  emancipation  ". 

Victor  To  that  object  Victor  Emmanuel  had  already  conse- 

fj^n  el  crated  his  life.  A  task,  necessarily  preliminary,  was  to 
set  his  own  house  in  order.  For  Piedmont,  as  for  Italy, 
the  outlook  was  black  when  on  the  evening  of  Novara 
Victor  Emmanuel  was  called  to  the  throne.  Crushed 
beneath  a  terrible  military  disaster ;  burdened  with  a 
heavy  war  indemnity  ;  frontier  less  and  poor ;  without 
place  in  the  Councils  of  Europe — who  could,  in  1849, 
have  predicted  the  future  in  store  for  her  ?  In  the  midst 
of  reaction  Victor  Emmanuel  set  himself  resolutely  to 
the  work  of  reform,  and  to  aid  him  in  the  task  he  called  to 
his  councils  one  of  the  most  remarkable  statesmen  of  the 
nineteenth  century — Count  Camillo  di  Cavour. 
Cavour  By  birth  a  Piedmontese  noble,  Cavour  (1810-61)  had 
travelled  much,  especially  in  England,  where  he  made  a 
real  study  of  economic  and  political  questions.  In  1847 
he  started  the  Risorgimento — to  educate  the  Italians  in 


REACTION  AND  REVOLUTION  IN  ITALY  (1815-1849)    183 

constitutional  ideas,  and  in  1848  he  was  returned  as 
member  for  Turin  to  the  first  Parliament  of  Piedmont. 
Appointed  to  the  Ministry  of  Commerce  and  Agriculture 
(1850)  he  was  able  to  apply  the  sound  economic  and 
financial  principles  learnt  in  England,  and  the  material 
prosperity  of  Piedmont  advanced  by  leaps  and  bounds. 
In  1851  he  became  Minister  of  Finance  and  in  1852 
Prime  Minister.  He  at  once  announced  a  large  pro- 
gramme of  reform — financial,  military  and  ecclesiastical, 
and  at  the  same  time  declared  that  Piedmont  must 
"  begin  by  re-establishing  in  Europe,  as  well  as  in  Italy, 
a  position  and  prestige  equal  to  her  ambition". 

His  opportunity  came  with  the  outbreak  of  the  Sardinian 
Crimean  War.  Deserted  by  all  his  colleagues  and  sup- 
ported  only  by  the  King,  Cavour  determined  to  send  a 
large  Sardinian  contingent  to  join  England  and  France 
in  the  Crimea.  This  resolution  was  the  turning-point  in 
the  history  of  Sardinia  and  of  Italy.  The  troops  fought 
bravely ;  the  victory  of  Tchernaia  (16th  August,  1855) 
wiped  out  the  stain  of  Novara ;  Sardinia  recovered  her 
prestige,  and  when  the  Conference  assembled  in  Paris, 
Cavour  took  his  place  among  the  representatives  of  the 
Powers.  Austria  strongly  resented  both  his  presence  and 
his  mission,  but,  despite  her  protest,  Cavour  brought 
before  the  Congress  the  pitiable  condition  of  Italy,  more 
especially  of  Naples,  and  he  fearlessly  fixed  the  blame 
011  Austria.  England  and  France  cordially  supported 
him,  but  the  former  did  not  go  beyond  moral  support. 
Napoleon  III.  had  not  only  a  genuine  sentiment  for 
Italy,  but  definite  ambitions  for  himself.  Of  both  Cavour 
skilfully  made  use. 

"Que  peut-on  faire  pour  1'Italie?"    was   Napoleon's  Napoleon 
question  to  Cavour  in  1855.     In  1856  Cavour  answered 


184          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

it,  and  the  foundations  of  the  fateful  alliance  were  laid. 
Interrupted  for  the  moment  by  the  attempt  of  Orsini, 
an  Italian  conspirator,  on  the  life  of  Napoleon  (January, 
1858),  it  was  cemented  by  an  interview  between  Cavour 
and  the  Emperor  at  Plombieres  (20th  July,  1858).  Austria 
was  to  be  expelled,  and  Northern  and  Central  Italy  (in- 
cluding the  Papal  Legations)  were  to  be  united  under  the 
House  of  Savoy.  One  painful  sacrifice  Victor  Emmanuel 
had  to  make  at  once.  He  gave  his  daughter  Princess 
Clothilde  in  marriage  to  the  Emperor's  cousin  Prince 
Jerome  Napoleon  (Plon-plon).  Another  sacrifice,  hardly 
less  painful,  was  promised — the  cession  of  Savoy,  and 
possibly  Nice,  to  France. 

Cavour  would  infinitely  have  preferred  an  English 
alliance ;  but  Lord  Palmerston,  interviewed  in  1856, 
could  give  him  no  hope  of  armed  assistance ;  Cavour  was 
convinced  that  without  foreign  help  the  dead- weight  of 
Austria  could  never  be  moved,  and  he  was  compelled, 
therefore,  to  pin  his  faith  to  the  restless  ambition  of 
Napoleon. 


o 


CHAPTER  XVII 

THE  UNIFICATION  OP  ITALY  (1859-1871) 

But,  Italy,  my  Italy  ! 

Can  it  last  this  gleam  ? 
Can  she  live  and  be  strong  ? 

Or  is  it  another  dream 
Like  the  rest  we  have  dreamed  so  long  ? 

— MRS.  BROWNING. 

N    1st    January,    1859,    Europe    was    startled    byFraneo. 

Napoleon's  words   to   the   Austrian   ambassador  ^^mian 
in  Paris  :  "  Je  regrette  que  les  relations  entre  nous  soient  against 

r<   .,,  .  TT.  T~,        Austria, 

si  mauvaises  .  Still  more  suggestive  was  Victor  Em-1859 
manuel's  memorable  speech  at  the  opening  of  Parliament 
at  Turin  (10th  January)  :  "  Our  country,  small  in  terri- 
tory, has  acquired  credit  in  the  Councils  of  Europe, 
because  she  is  great  in  the  idea  she  represents,  in  the 
sympathy  she  inspires.  This  situation  is  not  free  from 
peril,  for  while  we  respect  treaties  we  cannot  be  in- 
sensible to  the  cry  of  anguish  (grido  di  dolore)  that 
comes  up  to  us  from  many  parts  of  Italy."  No  one 
could  misunderstand  the  allusion.  The  speech  excited 
the  wildest  enthusiasm  in  Italy,  and  profound  anxiety 
in  Europe.  "  It  fell,"  said  Sir  James  Hudson,  "  like  a 
rocket  on  the  treaties  of  1815."  England  did  her  best 
to  avert  the  coming  war,  but  on  23rd  April  Austria  sent 
to  Turin  an  ultimatum  demanding  disarmament.  Cavour 
confidently  accepted  the  challenge.  On  13th  May  Victor 

185 


186         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Emmanuel  went  to  Genoa  to  meet  Napoleon,  the  "  gener- 
ous ally  "  who  had  come  "  to  liberate  Italy  from  the  Alps 
to  the  Adriatic  ". 

The  allies  carried  everything  before  them.     The  victory 
of  Magenta  (4th  June)  drove  Austria  back  behind  the 
Mincio ;  Milan  was  occupied  in  triumph  (8th  June) ;  and 
on  24th  June  the  double  victory  of  San  Martino  and 
Solferino  drove   Austria  into   Venetia.     But   Napoleon 
was  already  alarmed  at  the  fruits  of  his  own  handiwork. 
The  Clericals,  encouraged  by  the  Empress,  were  growing 
restless  in  France ;  the  Prussians  were  reported  to  be 
mobilising  on  the  Rhine ;  the  outburst  of  national  feeling 
in  Italy  might  carry  things  further  than  he  had  intended. 
Truce  of     On  llth  July,  therefore,   Napoleon   met   the   Emperor 
Yillafranca  Francis  Joseph  at  Villafranca,  and  there,  without  Sar- 
dinia, terms  were  arranged  which  were  ratified  in  the 
Treaty  of  Zurich  (November,  1859).     Austria  was  to  cede 
Lombardy  to  Sardinia,   but  to  retain  Venetia  and  the 
great  fortress  of  Mantua.     The  Italians  felt  themselves 
betrayed ;  Cavour  resigned ;  on  all  sides  the  treachery 
of  the  "  vulpine  knave  "  was  bitterly  denounced.     In  the 
midst  of  growing  excitement   Victor  Emmanuel   alone 
kept  his  head.     The  paper  conditions,  as  he  well  knew, 
did  not  represent  the   real  achievements  of  1859.     An 
Union  of    enormous   step  had   been  taken  towards   freedom   and 
2atral      unity.     The  peoples   of   Central  Italy  were  absolutely 
Northern    resolved  neither  to  receive  back  their  old  rulers,  nor  to 

Italy 

become  parts  of  an  Italian  federation  under  the  Pope. 
In  1860  Modena,  Parma,  Tuscany  and  the  Romagna 
united  themselves  by  plebiscite  with  the  new  kingdom 
of  North  Italy. 

Savoy  Napoleon  now  claimed   his  price.     Victor  Emmanuel 

was  compelled  to  pay  it,  and  make  the  bitter  sacrifice  of 


THE  UNIFICATION  OF  ITALY  (1859-1871)         187 

Savoy  and  Nice.  Nice  gave  France  access  to  Italy ; 
Savoy,  though  not  Italian,  was  the  cradle  of  his  race. 
Garibaldi,  himself  a  Nizzard,  denounced  the  treachery  of 
Cavour  and  his  "  cowardly  set "  who  had  made  him  "  an 
alien  in  the  land  of  his  birth  ".  But  Cavour  was  not  less 
a  patriot  because  he  was  a  diplomatist,  and  knew  that 
Napoleon  dare  not  return  empty  handed  to  Paris.  And 
he  was  beginning  to  understand  how  much  had  been 
achieved.  On  2nd  April,  1860,  Victor  Emmanuel  opened 
at  Turin  a  Parliament  representative  of  no  less  than 
11,000,000  Italians. 

The  credit  of  the  next  great  step  towards  unification  Garibaldi's 
belongs  not  to  Cavour  nor  to  Victor  Emmanuel  but  toJJ^Two 
Garibaldi: — not   to  the  statesmen  but   to  the   "  knight  Sicilies 
errant ".     The  tyranny  of  the  Bourbons  in  the  South  had 
now  reached  a  point  which  was  unendurable.     Ferdinand 
II.  ("  Boniba")  died  in  1859  and  was  succeeded  by  Francis 
II.  ("Bombino"),  but  the  change  was  if  anything  for  the 
worse.     In  1860  the  Sicilians,  encouraged  by  Mazzini, 
raised  the  standard  of  revolt  at  Palermo,  Messina  and 
Catania.      Garibaldi,  collecting  his  famous  "thousand" 
volunteers,  took  ship  from  Genoa,  flew  to  their  assistance 
(May,  1860),  and  within  two  months  was  master  of  Sicily. 
Thence  he  crossed  to  the  mainland,  and  marched  without 
resistance  into  Naples  (7th  September).     Bombino  fled  to 
Gaeta,  and  Garibaldi  was  proclaimed  dictator  of  the  Two  Garibaldi 
Sicilies.     The  situation  was  now  exceedingly  complicated.  m 
The  marvellous  achievement  of  Garibaldi  had  raised  him 
to  the  position  of  a  popular  idol,  and  he  now  declared  that 
he  would  not  annex  his  conquests  to  the  Crown  of  Italy 
until  he  could  proclaim  Victor  Emmanuel  in  Rome  itself. 
Cavour,   though   he    had    secretly   abetted    Garibaldi's 
enterprise,  realised  the  extreme  danger  of  his  attitude. 


188         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Pio  Nono  had  lately  proclaimed  a  crusade  for  the  recovery 
of  the  Romagna,  and  Victor  Emmanuel  had  despatched 
troops  for  the  twofold  purpose  of  defending  the  Romagna 
from  the  Pope  and,  if  necessary,  of  obstructing  Garibaldi's 
attack  on  Rome  itself.  Cavour  had  to  use  all  his  adroit- 
ness in  this  delicate  situation.  The  whole  of  Europe, 
except  England,  was  against  him ;  the  Pope  put  the  King 
under  the  ban  of  the  Church,  and  Garibaldi,  mistrusting 
the  ways  of  diplomacy,  was  eager  to  advance  on  Rome, 
where  the  Pope  was  under  the  protection,  diplomatic  and 
military,  of  France.  The  situation  was  intensely  critical, 
but  it  was  saved  by  the  genius  of  Cavour.  "  If  we  are 
not  in  La  Cattolica  before  Garibaldi  we  are  lost;  the 
revolution  would  spread  all  over  Italy.  We  are  com- 
pelled to  act."  Thus  he  wrote  on  llth  September; 
exactly  a  week  later  (18th  September)  the  Sardinian 
army  met  and  routed  the  Papal  troops — mostly  foreign 
mercenaries  under  French  officers — at  Castel  Fidardo, 
and  on  the  29th  compelled  General  Lamoriciere  to 
Union  of  surrender  at  Ancona.  Meanwhile  the  Garibaldians  and 
sKand  Neapolitans  had  been  engaged  on  the  Volturno  (19th 
September-lst  Octobe-r)  without  decisive  result.  In 
October  Victor  Emmanuel  joined  Garibaldi;  the  Two 
Sicilies  were  annexed  by  plebiscite  to  the  Italian  king- 
dom ;  and  having  taken  Capua  (2nd  November),  Garibaldi 
and  Victor  Emmanuel  rode  into  Naples  side  by  side 
(7th  November).  Garibaldi,  having  introduced  the  King 
to  his  new  subjects,  refused  all  reward  or  decoration  and 
retired  to  Caprera.  Francis  held  out  for  some  months 
at  Gaeta,  but  after  the  departure  of  the  French  fleet 
surrendered  to  Victor  Emmanuel  (13th  February,  1861). 
On  18th  February  a  Parliament,  representing  all  Italy 
save  Rome  and  Venice,  met  at  Turin.  The  Union  of 


THE  UNIFICATION  OF  ITALY  (1859-1871)         189 

North  and  South   was   formally  completed,  and  Victor 
Emmanuel  reigned  over  23,000,000  Italians. 

But  without  Rome  Italy,  as  Castelar  said,  was  "  a  head-  Death  of 
less  body  ".     Garibaldi  was  determined  to  take  it ;  Cavour 
desired  it  not  less  ardently,  but  he  knew,  as  Garibaldi 
did  not,  that  the  diplomatic  difficulties  were  insuperable. 
In  this  hour  of  great  need  Italy  lost  her  greatest  states- 
man (5th  June,  1861).      Cavour  had  not  Mazzini's  pro- 
|  phetic  gifts ;  he  could  not  arouse  popular  enthusiasm  like 
1  Garibaldi ;  he  was  perhaps  less  cool  than   Victor  Em- 
'  manuel,  but  he  was  an  enlightened  domestic  reformer 
and  the  greatest  diplomatist  in  Europe.     He  gauged  to  a 
nicety  the  political  situation ;  he  knew  the  limits  of  the 
possible;    to   him,  therefore,  more   than   to   any  other 
individual,  Italy  owes  her  unity  and  freedom. 

One  problem  he  left  unsolved.     The  position  of  theTliePro_ 
Papacy  in  Italy   presented   indeed  a   problem   perhaps  j^J.^ 
insoluble.     Cavour,  like  his  master,  attempted  to  induce  and  state 
the  Pope  to  accept  the  principle  of  "  a  free  Church  in  a 
free  State  (libera  Chiesa  in  liber o  stato),  to  surrender  the 
patrimony  of  St.  Peter — the  last  remnant  of  the  Papal 
States — and  to  retain  simply  a  spiritual  sovereignty.    But 
the  Pope  was  inflexible.     Prayers  and  threats  alike  failed 
to   move  him ;   to  nothing   but  actual   force  would  he 
yield. 

Garibaldi  was  determined  to  apply  it.      Raising  theGaribaldi 
cry  "  Rome  or  death,"  he  once  more  crossed  from  Sicily  and  Rome 
to  the   mainland   (July,   1862).      The   Government  was 
compelled  to  interfere,  and  at  Aspromonte  (29th  August) 
his  volunteers  were  scattered,  and  Garibaldi  himself  was 
wounded  and  taken  prisoner.     But  in  1864  Victor  Em- 
manuel at  last  came  to  terms  with  Napoleon  in  regard 
to  Rome.     By  the  September  Convention  (1864)  France 


190          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN*  EUROPE 

agreed  to  evacuate  Rome  during  the  next  two  years, 
and  in  1865  the  Italian  capital  was  transferred  from 
Turin  to  Florence. 

Union  of  But  for  the  moment  interest  was  concentrated  on 
anditaiy  another  part  of  Italy.  The  long  rivalry  between  Austria 
arid  Prussia  had  now  reached  the  zenith,  and  in  1865  it 
was  clear  that  the  inevitable  conflict  would  not  be  much 
longer  postponed.1  In  that  year  Victor  Emmanuel  offered 
his  assistance  to  Austria  in  return  for  the  cession  of  Venetia. 
Though  the  refusal  of  Francis  Joseph  was  natural  it  was 
none  the  less  fatal.  In  1866  Bismarck  came  to  terms 
with  Italy,  and  in  the  same  year  the  Austro-Prussian  war 
broke  out.  Disastrously  defeated  in  Germany,  Austria 
more  than  held  her  own  in  Italy.  Both  on  land  and  sea 
the  Italian  forces  were  defeated  (June- July,  1866).  But 
Bismarck  kept  his  word ;  Venice  was  wrested  from 
Austria,  and  by  plebiscite  united  itself  with  Italy  (Octo- 
ber, 1866). 

Almost  simultaneously  the  last  of  the  French  troops 
evacuated  Rome,  and  Italy  was  at  last  rid  of  the 
foreigner. 

Rome  But  Rome,  and  Rome  only,  still  remained  to  mar  the 

unity  of  Italy.  Garibaldi  was  resolved  that  it  should 
mar  it  no  longer.  Encouraged  by  the  Government  he 
raised  a  band  of  volunteers,  landed  at  Leghorn  and 
marched  on  Rome.  Napoleon  despatched  a  French  force 
for  its  defence ;  at  Mentana  (3rd  November,  1867)  the 
French  routed  the  Garibaldians,  and  once  more  occupied 
Rome.  Garibaldi,  still  the  hero  of  the  populace,  was 
arrested  by  the  Government,  and  deported  to  Caprera. 
But  the  final  scene  in  the  long  drama  was  at  hand. 
The  outbreak  of  the  Franco-German  War  (1870)  neces- 

1  See  p.  211. 


THE  UNIFICATION  OF  ITALY  (1859-1871)         191 

sitated  the  withdrawal  of  the  French  troops  from  Rome. 
Once  again  Victor  Emmanuel  appealed  to  the  Pope  "  with 
the  affection  of  a  son,  with  the  faith  of  |a  Catholic,  with 
the  soul  of  an  Italian,"  to  accept  the  inevitable.  The 
only  reply  was  a  non  possumus.  The  Italian  troops, 
therefore,  moved  on  Rome;  only  formal  resistance  was 
offered,  and  on  20th  September,  1870,  the  royal  troops 
occupied  the  city.  A  plebiscite  yielded  40,788  votes 
for  the  King,  46  for  the  Pope,  and  on  2nd  June,  1871, 
Victor  Emmanuel  made  a  triumphal  entry  into  the 
city,  henceforth  to  be  the  capital  of  Italy.  "  The  work 
to  which  we  consecrated  our  lives  is  accomplished.  After 
long  trials  Italy  is  restored  to  herself  and  to  Rome."  So 
spake  "il  re  galantuomo"  to  the  first  Italian  Parlia- 
ment which  met  in  Rome.  The  work  of  unification  was 
accomplished. 

Italy  has  had  to  pass  through  much  tribulation  since  Italy  since 
1871.  The  art  of  Parliamentary  Government  is  not 
learned  in  a  day.  "  The  worst  of  chambers,"  said  Cavour, 
"is  better  than  the  most  brilliant  of  ante-chambers." 
Had  he  lived,  the  path  of  Parliamentary  Government 
might  have  been  smoothed  for  his  country :  without 
him  it  has  been  stony  and  not  always  clean.  And  while 
there  has  been  corruption  at  one  end  of  the  scale,  there 
has  been  social  disorder  at  the  other.  In  the  South 
particularly  it  has  been  found  difficult  to  eradicate  the 
habits  formed  under  long  years  of  despotism.  Politically, 
not  less  than  socially,  there  is  a  wide  gulf  between  North 
and  South,  and  efforts  to  bridge  it  have  not  entirely  suc- 
ceeded. Moreover,  modern  Government  is  expensive 
— especially  where  there  is  leeway  to  make  up — and 
Italians  groan  under  a  terrible  load  of  taxation  and  debt. 

But  all  these  things  are  trivial  as  compared  with  the 


192          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

still  unsolved  problem  of  Church  and  State.  The  "  prisoner 
of  the  Vatican,"  whose  infallibility  was  decreed  by  an 
(Ecumenical  Council  (1869)  on  the  eve  of  the  dissolution 
of  his  Temporal  Power,  still  maintains  the  non-possumus 
attitude,  still  declines  all  attempts  at  compromise.  Until 
this  problem  is  solved,  good  citizenship  and  loyal  Catholic- 
ism must,  in  theory  at  least,  remain  divorced  in  Italy,  to 
the  distress  and  embarrassment  of  all  those  to  whom  both 
sentiments  are  precious. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

GERMANY  (1815-1851) 

REACTION,  EEVOLUTION  AND  KEACTION 

By  the  help  of  God  I  hope  to  defeat  the  German  revolution  just 
as  I  vanquished  the  conqueror  of  the  world. — METTERNICH. 

IT   has   been   said  of  the  Italian   Risorgimento  that  The 
it  was    "the   one   moment   of    nineteenth-ce 
history  when  politics  assumed  something  of  the  char- 
acter of  poetry  "  (Lecky).     Nor  can  it  be  denied  that  a 
romantic  interest  attaches  to  the  story  which  enshrines 
the  memories  of  Mazzini  and  Daniel  Manin,  of  Bettino 
Ricasoli  and  the  Poerios,  of  D'Azeglio  and  Nino  Bixio 
and  Garibaldi. 

But  the  unification  of  Germany  was  more  substantial 
and  imposing,  though  less  romantic  and  less  difficult. 
Bismarck  had  far  more  to  work  upon  than  Cavour.  Italy 
knew  nothing  of  unity  between  the  fall  of  the  Roman 
and  the  transient  existence  of  the  Napoleonic  Empire. 
Germany  for  a  thousand  years  had  never  lost  the  sem- 
blance of  unity,  however  little  it  realised  the  substance. 
Nevertheless,  the  establishment  of  the  Federal  Empire 
under  the  Hohenzollern  must  take  rank  as  the  largest,  if 
not  the  most  amazing,  political  achievement  of  the  century 
in  Europe. 

To  disclose  the  main  steps  by  which  that  consumma- 
13  193 


194         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

tion  was  attained  is  the  purpose  of  this  and  the  following 
chapter. 

The  Settle-  ^he  leading  features  of  the  settlement  of  Germany 
mentof  jn  1815  jjave  keen  aiready  sketched.1  Both  from  the 
territorial  and  the  constitutional  standpoint  that  settle- 
ment was  full  of  significance.  By  the  relaxation  of  their 
grip  on  Poland  and  the  simultaneous  acquisition  of  large 
provinces  in  the  heart  of  Germany  and  upon  the  Rhine 
frontier  the  Hohenzollern  were  unconsciously  laying  the 
foundations  of  Prussian  hegemony  and  German  unity. 
The  gravitation  of  the  Habsburgs  towards  non-German 
lands  in  the  South  was  equally  significant.  The  sur- 
render of  the  Netherlands  and  the  establishment  of  a  pre- 
ponderant influence  in  Italy  proved  that  she  was  concen- 
trating her  energies  upon  the  consolidation  of  her 
dynastic  interests,  to  the  exclusion  of  those  of  Germany. 
The  constitutional  settlement  was,  as  we  have  seen,  a 
grievous  disappointment  to  the  patriotic  party.  Only  in 
Prussia  was  there  any  genuine  anxiety  for  a  strong  bond 
of  unity,  and  even  there  opinion  was  divided.  Austria 
was  equally  opposed  to  a  revival  of  the  old  Empire  and 
to  the  substitution  of  any  effective  federal  union.  The 
smaller  States  desired  the  system  which  would  interfere 
least  with  their  own  autocratic  government.  As  to 
unity  they  were,  for  the  most  part,  entirely  indifferent. 
The  "  Bund  "  was  the  characteristic  outcome  of  these 
divergent  and  ambitious  interests.  It  encouraged  the 
autocratic  tendencies  of  the  sovereign  princes,  and  at  the 
same  time  provided  the  weakest  guarantees  for  national 
defence  and  the  slenderest  basis  for  national  unity. 

But  no  more   in   Germany  than  in  Italy  could  the 
diplomatists  efface  the  effects  of  the  Napoleonic  occupa- 

1  See  pp.  127  seqq. 


196         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

tion.  Napoleon  had  let  light  into  many  dark  places ;  he 
had  reduced  the  political  divisions  from  800  to  30 ;  he 
had  imposed  taxes  which  were  equal  though  severe ;  he 
had  introduced  a  legal  and  administrative  system  which 
was  coherent  and  effective  :  above  all,  he  had  roused  the 
German  people  to  fight  him.  He  had  no  intention  of 
making  a  united  Germany  any  more  than  a  united  Italy, 
but  in  both  cases  he  contributed  powerfully  though  un- 
consciously to  that  consummation. 

Eeactioniu     The  period  of  German  history  between  1815  and  1848 
iany    is  one  of  almost  unrelieved  reaction.     In  Germany,  as  in 
Italy,  Metternich's  was  the  dominating  influence.     It  was, 
of  course,  in  the  Austrian  dominions  that  it  was  most 
directly  felt,  but,  to  the  disgust  of  the  "patriots,"  the 
reaction  was  hardly  less  marked  elsewhere.     The  Kings 
of  Bavaria  and  Wiirtemberg  and  the  grand  Duke  of  Baden 
did  indeed  grant  "  Charters "  on  the  French  model  to 
their    respective   subjects,   but   only   in    the    Duchy   of 
The  Weimar  were  the  stirrings  of  vigorous  political  life  really 

Festival1"8  discernible.  The  centre  of  the  Liberal  movement  was 
the  University  of  Jena,  where  the  students  organised 
themselves  into  a  society  for  the  promotion  of  German 
unity.  It  was  this  society  which  arranged  a  patriotic 
festival  at  the  Wartburg  to  commemorate  the  tercen- 
tenary of  the  Reformation  and  the  fourth  anniversary  of 
the  battle  of  Leipzic  (17th  October,  1817).  The  occasion 
was  more  than  innocent  and  the  incidents  were  devoid 
of  serious  significance,  but  they  excited  the  alarm  of  the 
reactionaries  ;  the  Duke  of  Weimar  was  bidden  to  curtail 
the  liberties  of  his  subjects,  and  the  Universities  and  the 
Press  were  henceforth  watched  with  even  greater  jealousy. 
In  1819  further  alarm  was  aroused  by  the  murder  of 
Kotzebue,  a  dramatist,  who  was  suspected  of  having 


GERMANY  (1815-1851)  197 

warned  the  Czar  Alexander  against  the  revolutionary 
spirit  in  the  German  Universities.  Hardenberg  made  it 
an  excuse  for  refusing  to  establish  representative  insti- 
tutions in  Prussia,  and  Metternich  summoned  representa- 
tives of  the  leading  States  to  confer  with  him  at  Karlsbad. 
"By  the  help  of  God  I  hope  to  defeat  the  German  re- 
volution just  as  I  vanquished  the  conqueror  of  the  world." 
For  the  moment  it  seemed  as  though  Metternich's  boast 
might  be  justified.  The  Karlsbad  Decrees,  subsequently  The 
adopted  by  the  Federal  Diet  at  Frankfort,  accurately 
reflect  both  his  methods  and  aims.  They  extinguished 
liberty  of  the  Press ;  transferred  the  control  of  the  Uni- 
versities to  Government  officials ;  prohibited  the  forma- 
tion of  societies  and  the  holding  of  political  meetings; 
and  established  at  Mainz  a  central  commission  which 
has  been  truly  described  as  "  a  sort  of  inquisition  for 
the  discovery  and  punishment  of  democratic  agitators." 

Metternich  was  once  more  master  in  his  own  German 
house. 

Thus  matters  went  on  with  little  change  until  the  out-  Revolu- 
break  of  the  July  Revolution  in  France.     Nor  did  that  ^Q  ° 
event  seriously  disturb  the  even  current  of  affairs  in  the 
larger  German  States.      In  some  of  the  smaller  States 
there  were  faint  echoes  of  the  Parisian  movement,  and 
the  rulers  of  Hanover,  Saxony,  Brunswick  and  Hesse 
were  compelled  to  make  some  concessions  to  the  Liberal 
opinions  of  their  subjects ;  but  the  domination  of  Metter- 
nich was  still  unshaken  ;  to  him  all  concession  was  "  un- 
pardonable error,"  and  in  his  hands  the  machinery  of  the 
"  Bund  "  was  used  exclusively  to  one  end — to  repress  any  The 
sign  of  a  revolutionary  or  even  a  Liberal  agitation  in" 
any  of  the  German  States.     At  the  Diet  of  1832  oppor- 
tunity was  taken  to  confirm  the  Karlsbad  Decrees.     A 


198          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

monster  meeting  had  been  held  in  the  Palatinate  to 
celebrate  "  the  dawn  of  liberty,  of  German  unity  and  the 
fraternisation  of  all  free  nations".  This  was  enough  for 
Metternich.  He  declared  that  "Germany  is  a  prey  to 
frightful  disorders,"  and  that  "the  powers  of  the  Diet 
must  be  set  in  motion  to  repress  it".  At  his  bidding 
they  were.  Once  more  political  meetings  were  for- 
bidden ;  the  Press  was  censored ;  all  revolutionary  songs 
and  symbols  were  prohibited,  and  it  was  announced  that 
the  Diet  claimed  the  right  to  interfere  in  the  individual 
States  in  the  event  of  a  deadlock  between  the  ruler  and 
his  Constitutional  Assembly. 

The  discovery  of  a  conspiracy  for  blowing  up  the  Diet 
at  Frankfort  in  1833  still  further  stiffened  Metternich's 
back.  A  conference  was  held  at  Miinchengratz  in  1833 
between  the  Emperors  of  Austria  and  Russia  and  the 
Crown  Prince  of  Prussia,  who  entered  into  a  mutual 
league  not  only  to  suppress  Liberal  movements  in  Ger- 
many but  to  resist  the  democratic  tendencies  of  England 
and  France  in  Europe  at  large. 

The  In  all  this  dreary  period  between  1815  and  1848  there 

appeared  in  Germany  only  one  symptom  which  gave  hope 
of  better  things  to  come.  While  the  federal  machinery  was 
employed  almost  entirely  for  the  repression  of  popular 
feeling ;  while  the  individual  rulers,  particularly  in  the 
greater  States,  were  consistently  reactionary ;  while  the 
hopes  of  unity  grew  fainter,  there  was  in  progress  one 
development  fraught  with  tremendous  consequences  for 
the  future  of  Germany. 

Prussia,  with  her  scattered  and  heterogeneous  provinces, 
was  the  first  to  realise  the  inconvenience  and  loss  in- 
volved in  the  existing  fiscal  system.  German  industry 
was  strangled  by  the  innumerable  custom  barriers  be- 


GERMANY  (1815-1851)  199 

tween  State  and  State ;  transportation  was  almost  impos- 
sible ;  means  of  communication  were  non-existent ;  trade 
was  at  a  standstill,  and  the  people  groaned  under  the 
weight  of  taxation  required  for  the  maintenance  of  ia 
mischievous  and  antiquated  system. 

In  1818  the  Prussian  minister,  Maassen,  took  the  first 
step  by  the  establishment  of  free  commercial  intercourse 
between  the  several  Hohenzollern  provinces.     Some  of 
the  Southern  States  imitated  the  arrangement,  and  be- 
tween 1819  and  1836  practically  all  the  German  States 
except  Austria,  associated   themselves  with   Prussia   in 
a  vast  Customs-Union   or  Zollverein.      All  commercial 
barriers  between  State  and  State  were  thrown  down; 
internal   custom-houses  were  destroyed;  the  vast  army 
of  officials  was  dismissed,  and  a  common  external  tariff 
was  arranged.     Not  only  was  an  immense  impulse  thus 
given  to  German  trade,  but  also  to  the  sentiment  and 
fact  of  German  unity.      The  construction  of  railways, 
roads  and  canals;  the  improvement  of  postal  arrange- 
ments;  the   promotion  of  commercial  intercourse  came 
in  the  wake  of  the  Zollverein  and  silently  prepared  the 
way  for  organic  political  changes  in  the  future.     Thus 
the   significance    of    the  Zollverein    is    threefold.      It 
brought  the  several  States  into  more  neighbourly  rela- 
tions, and  provided  a  strong  financial  guarantee  against 
disruption ;  it  brought  them  together  under  the  leadership 
of  Prussia,  and  it  accustomed  them  to  the  exclusion  of 
Austria.     Tardily  Austria   awoke  to  the  significance  of 
these  events,  and  in  1852  made  desperate  efforts  to  obtain 
admission  to  the  Zollverein,  but  by  that  time  Prussia 
was  strong  enough  to  insist  on  her  exclusion.     Thus  the 
extent  to  which  the  Zollverein  contributed  to  the  ultimate 
Prussianisation  of  Germany  can  hardly  be  over-estimated. 


200         THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Constitu-        Prussia  was,  meanwhile,  taking  steps  to  put  her  own 
forin  in  *~  house  in  order.     Frederick  William  III. — one  of  the  few 
Prussia      weaklings  produced  by  the  virile  Hohenzollern  race — had 
fallen  more  and  more  under  the  influence  of  Metternich. 
In  1815  he  had  promised  to  establish  a  central  represen- 
tative Assembly  elected  by  the  Provincial  Estates  and  to 
grant  to  his  people  a  written  Constitution.      He  was 
never  intentionally  faithless  to  his  promise,  but  excellent 
reasons  for  delay  were  suggested  by  the  reactionaries  in 
Vienna  and  Berlin,  and  in  1840,  after  a  reign  of  forty- 
three  years,  the  old  King  died — his  promise  still  unfulfilled. 
During  his  last  years  the  Progressives  had  acquiesced  in 
the  postponement  of  reform,  partly  out  of  deference  to 
the  prejudices  of  the  King,  and  partly  in  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  important  results  secured  to  Prussia  by  his 
enlightened  economic  and  financial  administration. 
Frederick        All  the  more  eagerly,  therefore,  did  the  Prussian  Liberals 
Ivllliam     welcome  to  the  throne  his  successor  Frederick  William 
IV.  (1840-61).      But   the  new  King,  though  he  was  a 
cultured   patron   of    art    and   letters,   believed    no    less 
ardently  than  his  father  in  the  Divine  Right  of  monarchy. 
Lacking,  however,   his    predecessor's   prestige    he    was 
unable  to  resist  altogether  the  demand  for  some  constitu- 
United       tional  concessions.     In  1847,  therefore,  he  summoned  to 
5etatclal  Berlin    representatives  from  all   the  Provincial  Estates. 
Berlin        The  Liberals  bitterly  resented  the  cumbrous   and  anti- 
quated form   of   the  States-general,  and  also  the  strict 
limitations  imposed   by  royal  edict  upon  its  functions. 
While  the  Diet  might  advise  it  must  not  control.     "  The 
Crown  can  and  must  govern  according  to  the  laws  of  God 
and  of  the  land,  not  according  to  the  will  of  majorities." 
Such  a  subordinate  position  the  Progressives  were  not 
willing  to  accept :  violent  language  was  used,  and  in  four 


GERMANY  (1815-1851)  201 

months  the  Assembly  was  dissolved  and  the  experiment 
of  a  "United  Provincial  Diet"  was  at  an  end.  One 
more  effort  at  reform  had  failed;  one  more  incentive 
had  been  provided  to  Revolution.  Revolution  came  in 
1848. 

In  Germany,  as  in  Italy,  the  revolutionary  movements  of  The  year 
1848  had  a  twofold  aspect  and  significance.     They  were{£Jg°lu 
directed,  on  the  one  side,  to  the  extension  of  constitu-  Germany 
tional  liberties  in  the  several  and  divided  States ;  and  on 
the  other,  towards  the  realisation  of  national  unity  in 
some  permanent  and  effective  form. 

Baden,  the  most  liberally  governed  State  in  Germany, 
was  the  first  to  feel  the  impulse  of  the  February  Revolu- 
tion in  Paris.  On  3rd  March  the  King  granted  a  new 
Constitution,  which  formed  a  model  for  the  other  German 
States.  Ministerial  responsibility ;  freedom  of  the  Press ; 
religious  equality ;  trial  by  jury,  and  equality  of  taxation, 
were  among  the  concessions  demanded  and  made.  The 
rulers  of  Wurtemberg,  Nassau,  Darmstadt,  Hesse-Cassel, 
Weimar  and  Brunswick  followed  suit ;  in  Bavaria,  King 
Lewis,  despite  the  comparative  liberality  of  his  rule,  was 
obliged  to  abdicate  in  favour  of  his  son  Maximilian  II. 
(20th  March),  and  Saxony  and  Hanover  ultimately 
followed  the  lead  of  Baden. 

In  Berlin  disturbances  broke  out  on  18th  March,  and 
Frederick  William  IV.  at  once  conceded  the  whole  Baden 
programme.  An  accidental  collision  between  the  troops 
and  the  people  led  to  some  serious  street  fighting  (18th- 
20th  March),  and  Berlin  was  only  pacified  by  the  re- 
moval of  the  troops  from  the  capital  and  a  promise  from 
the  King  to  assume  the  leadership  "  of  a  free  and  new- 
born German  nation  ".  The  United  Diet  was  to  meet  im- 
mediately, with  power  to  summon  a  national  Constituent 


202         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Assembly  which  should  draft  a  Parliamentary  Constitu- 
tion for  the  Hohenzollern  dominions. 

Revolution  But  naturally  it  was  in  Vienna,  so  long  the  centre  of 
reaction,  that  the  convulsion  was  most  violent :  so  violent 
indeed  as  to  shake  even  Metternich  from  the  pedestal 
of  power.  The  insurrection  of  13th  March  drove  Metter- 
nich into  exile  in  England;  that  of  15th  May  com- 
pelled the  Emperor  Ferdinand  himself  to  fly  to  Innsbruck. 
But  the  insurrection  in  Vienna  was  the  least  of  the 
difficulties  by  which  in  this  critical  year  the  Habsburg 
Emperor  was  confronted. 

In  the  spring  of  1848  it  seemed  as  if  nothing  could  save 
from  immediate  dissolution  the  heterogeneous  mass  of 
races  and  nationalities  which  were  united  under  the 
Austrian  Crown.  Italy,  Hungary  and  Bohemia  blazed 
simultaneously  into  revolution.  The  character  and  fate 
of  the  Italian  Revolution  have  been  already  indicated.1 
insurrec-  Hungary  and  Bohemia  demanded  not  separation  but  con- 
Hungary  stitutional  autonomy  under  the  Habsburgs.  The  Habs- 
Bohemia  burgs  were  saved  only  by  the  racial  disunion  of  the 
several  provinces  subject  to  their  rule.  Between  the 
Magyars  of  Hungary,  the  Slavs  of  Bohemia  and  the 
Italians  there  was  nothing  in  common  save  dislike  of 
Austrian  rule.  "  From  the  charnel  house  of  the  cabinet 
of  Vienna  a  pestilential  wind  sweeps  over  us,  benumbing 
our  senses  and  paralysing  our  national  spirit."  So  spake 
Kossuth,  the  leader  of  the  Hungarian  revolt ;  but  Hungary 
itself  had  to  contend  with  the  separatist  tendencies  of 
Serbs  and  Croats  to  the  south  of  the  Drave.  In  June 
there  met  at  Prague,  a  pan-slavist  congress  representative 
of  Czechs,  Moravians,  Poles,  Slovaks,  Serbs  and  Croats ; 
but  riots  broke  out,  and  Prince  Windischgratz,  >who 

1  See  p.  180. 


GERMANY  (1815-1851)  203 

commanded  the  Austrian  forces,  reduced  the  city  to 
submission,  and  by  the  end  of  June  the  Bohemian  move- 
ment collapsed.  In  October,  Vienna  rose  for  the  third 
time,  and  the  Emperor  took  refuge  in  Olmiitz,  a  fortress 
in  Moravia.  But  against  disciplined  troops  bravely  led 
the  Viennese  were  as  powerless  as  Italians  or  Czechs, 
and  by  31st  October  Windischgratz  was  master  of  the 
capital. 

But  Hungary  was  still  unsubdued.     The  task  was  too 
much  for  the  Emperor  Ferdinand.     On  2nd  December, 
1848,  he  abdicated  in  favour  of  his  nephew  the  Archduke  Accession 
Francis  Joseph,  who  at  the*  age  of  eighteen  assumed  the  Joseph  °U 
heavy  burden  of  the  Imperial  Crown. 

The  Hungarians  at  once  refused  to  acknowledge  the 
new  sovereign;  war  broke  out;  the  Hungarians  were 
badly  beaten  at  Kapolna  (2nd  February,  1849) ;  the 
Hungarian  Constitution  was  rescinded,  and  Hungary 
was  incorporated  in  the  Austrian  Empire.  In  the 
guerilla  warfare  that  followed  the  Magyars  under  Kossuth 
and  Gorgei  more  than  held  their  own,  and  on  14th 
April  Kossuth  proclaimed  the  independence  of  Hungary 
and  the  perpetual  exclusion  of  the  House  of  Habsburg 
from  their  throne.  In  the  name  of  legitimacy  the  Em- 
peror now  appealed  to  the  Czar  Nicholas.  Russia  re- 
sponded with  200,000  men ;  the  rebellion  was  crushed ; 
Hungary  lost  all  its  independent  rights  and  was  reduced 
to  a  state  of  simple  vassalage.  The  remnants  of  rebellion 
were  stamped  out  with  ferocity:  hundreds  of  patriots 
were  sent  to  the  gallows ;  Kossuth  escaped  to  England. 

Victorious  over  its  foes  in  Italy,  in  Bohemia  and  in 
Hungary  the  Austrian  Government,  now  in  the  strong 
hands  of  Schwarzenberg,  gave  short  shrift  to  its  German 
subjects.  The  "  March  laws  "  were  repealed,  and  Metter- 


204         THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

nich's  autocratic  and  centralised  system  was  restored. 
From  Vienna  the  reaction  spread  to  Berlin  and  the  lesser 
courts;  the  revolutionary  impulse  of  1848  was  spent. 
Absolutism  was  once  more  supreme. 

It  has  been  shown  that  as  regards  the  domestic  liberties 
of  the  several  States  the  revolutionary  year  left  little 
permanent  impress  upon  Germany.  How  fared  it  with 
the  movement  towards  national  unity  ? 

Movement  So  far  back  as  October,  1847,  representatives  from  the 
National  States  belonging  to  the  Zollverein  had  met  at  Heppenheim, 
near  Heidelberg,  with  the  object  of  enlarging  the  scope  of 
that  union  in  a  political  direction ;  but  the  agitation  which 
broke  out  in  the  spring  of  1848  convinced  the  leaders 
that  the  time  had  come  for  the  realisation  of  a  larger 
scheme.  They  determined  to  call  a  Convention  to  meet 
at  Frankfort  for  the  purpose  of  organising  a  Constituent 
Assembly  for  the  whole  of  Germany  and  at  the  same 
time  to  obtain  the  sanction  of  Prussia  and  the  Federal 
Diet  to  such  an  Assembly.  The  assent  of  Frederick 
William  IV.  was  given  on  17th  March;  that  of  the 
Federal  Diet  on  30th  March,  and  the  Preliminary  Con- 
vention met  on  the  31st.  Arrangements  for  the  Con- 
stituent Assembly  were  rapidly  completed,  and  on  the 
18th  of  May,  1848,  586  representatives,  elected  on  the 
basis  of  universal  suffrage,  came  together  at  Frankfort 
from  every  State  of  the  Germanic  Confederation. 
The  This  historic  Assembly  was  charged  with  no  less  a  task 

Parliament than  the  drafting  of  a  Constitution  for  the  whole  of 
1848-49  Germany.  Among  many  difficulties  which  confronted  it 
the  most  serious  arose  from  the  question  as  to  the  re- 
lation of  the  mosaic  Empire  of  the  Habsburgs  to  the 
Germanic  body.  On  this  point  the  Frankfort  Parliament 
was  sharply  divided.  The  "  Great  Germans,"  including 


GERMANY  (1815-1851)  205 

not  only  the  Austrian  deputies,  but  also  those  from 
Bavaria  and  most  of  the  South  German  States,  stoutly 
opposed  the  exclusion  of  the  non-German  Habsburg  pro- 
vinces. The  "  Little  Germans,"  starting  from  the  idea  of  a 
glorified  Zollverein  and  looking  to  the  headship  of  Prussia, 
insisted  that  their  inclusion  would  be  fatal  to  the  reali- 
sation of  German  unity  in  an  effective  form.  Again  as 
regards  a  Federal  Executive  Austria  favoured  a  Directory 
of  seven  Princes,  while  the  Little  Germans  insisted  on 
an  hereditary  Empire.  On  both  points  the  latter  event- 
ually carried  their  point,  and  in  March,  1849,  the  new 
Constitution  was  completed.  Under  this,  Germany  was 
henceforth  to  be  a  Federal  State  under  an  hereditary 
Emperor.  There  was  to  be  a  Parliament  of  two  Chambers, 
one  representing  the  States  of  Germany,  the  other  the 
people,  and  to  this  Parliament  the  federal  ministers  were  offer  of 
to  be  responsible.  On  28th  March  the  Imperial  Crown  ^^ 
was  offered  to  Frederick  IV.  of  Prussia.  But  by  this  Frederick 


time  the  situation  had  materially  altered.  Austria  was  no  iv.of 
longer  a  negligible  quantity.  Under  the  young  Emperor 
and  the  new  minister,  Schwarzenberg,  she  was  fast  re- 
gaining the  position  she  had  temporarily  lost.  Frederick 
William  IV.  was  hardly  less  under  the  influence  of  Schwar- 
zenberg than  his  predecessor  was  under  that  of  Metter- 
nich.  He  had  no  mind  to  brave  the  wrath,  possibly 
the  forcible  opposition,  of  Austria  ;  still  less  to  accept  the 
Imperial  Crown  at  the  hands  of  a  democratic  Assembly 
and  thus  proclaim  himself  "  the  serf  of  the  Revolution  ". 
The  offer  was,  therefore,  to  the  grievous  disappointment 
of  the  Progressives,  definitely  declined  by  him.  Prussia 
was  not,  in  Bismarck's  phrase,  to  be  "  dissolved  in  Ger- 
many." Germany  was  to  be  absorbed  ultimately  into 
Prussia  ;  but  not  until  the  offer  of  the  Imperial  Crown 


206         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

came  from  the  sovereign  princes  would  a  Prussian 
sovereign  by  Divine  Right  deign  to  accept  it.  The 
Frankfort  Assembly  struggled  against  the  acceptance  of 
defeat;  but  defeat  was  now  inevitable.  The  States 
withdrew  their  delegates,  and  the  radical  rump  having 
transferred  their  deliberations  to  Stuttgart  were  event- 
ually dispersed  by  force  (July,  1849). 

Kestoration  Two  years  of  confusion  followed,  but  in  1851  the 
"fBund"  "Bund"  was  restored  and  the  work  of  the  Unionists 
seemed  utterly  effaced.  In  reality  it  was  not  so.  The 
Frankfort  Parliament  had  given  a  powerful  impulse  to 
the  movement  for  unity,  though  the  end  was  ultimately 
achieved  by  very  different  means.  • 

The  years  between  1851  and  1861  were  in  the  main 
years  of  placid  reaction  in  Germany.  Austria  recovered 
from  the  troubles  of  1848  with  a  rapidity  which  reflects 
the  highest  credit  on  Schwarzenberg,  but  her  strength 
was  sapped  by  the  disaffection  of  Hungary.  In  Prussia 
important  reforms  were  effected  under  Von  Roon  in 
armaments  and  military  organisation ;  but  for  ten  years 
the  surface  calm  was  unbroken  in  Germany.  The  War  of 
Italian  Independence  in  1859,  dealt  as  we  have  seen,1  a 
serious  blow  at  the  political  and  military  prestige  of 
Austria,  but  not  until  after  1860  did  things  begin  to 
move  with  any  rapidity  in  Germany.  The  decade  be- 
tween 1860  and  1870  is  the  most  fateful  in  her  annals 
and  demands  a  chapter  to  itself. 

'P.  186. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

THE  PBUSSIANISATION  OF  GERMANY  (1860-1870) 

Germany  became  strong  in  herself  and  in  the  world  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  through  Prussia,  through  Prussian  politics  and 
military  service,  through  Prussian  sense  for  actualities  and  Prussian 
cult  of  power. — PROF.  ERIC  MARCKS. 

IN  1861  Frederick  William  IV.  of  Prussia  died  andwiiiiami. 
was  succeeded  by  his  brother,  who  took  the  title  of 
William  I.  In  1862  he  called  to  his  counsels  Count  Otto 
von  Bismarck.  It  was  these  two  men  who,  with  the 
help  of  Von  Boon  and  Moltke,  made  the  modern  German 
Empire. 

The  new  King  had  been  Regent  since  1858  and  came 
to  the  throne  with  a  clear  comprehension  of  the  work 
before  him.  The  new  minister  was  equally  clear  both  as 
to  end  and  means,  and  had  already  much  experience  both 
in  German  politics  and  European  diplomacy. 

Born  in  1815,  Otto  von  Bismarck  was  by  descent  and  Bismarck 
temper  a  typical  Prussian  Junker  (squire).  Educated 
at  the  Universities  of  Gottingen  and  Berlin  he  entered 
the  Civil  Service,  but  in  1839  was  recalled  to  manage  the 
paternal  estates  in  Pomerania.  Known  as  "mad  Bis- 
marck " — a  hard  rider  and  a  hard  drinker — he  neverthe- 
less proved  his  administrative  capacity,  and  served  as 
Deputy  for  his  Order  in  the  provincial  Pomeranian 
Diet  in  1845.  Two  years  later  he  became  a  member 

207 


208         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

of  the  United  Diet  at  Berlin.  He  was  at  this  time  a 
rigid  Conservative  with  a  strong  religious  belief  in  the 
divinely  appointed  monarchy,  and  used  every  effort  to 
save  Frederick  William  IV.  not  merely  from  the  ex- 
treme democrats,  but  from  his  own  transient  'deference  to 
Liberalism.  In  1851  he  was  sent  as  Prussian  representa- 
tive to  the  newly  reconstituted  Federal  Diet  at  Frankfort. 
This  was  the  turning-point  of  his  political  career.  He 
entered  the  Diet  with  feelings  of  deep  reverence  for 
Austria  and  its  policy.  He  left  it  eight  years  later  con- 
vinced (as  he  wrote  to  Von  Schleinitz)  "  that  the  one 
constant  factor  in  Austrian  policy  is  its  jealousy  of 
Prussia,  and  that  for  every  minor  German  State  the  royal 
road  to  Austria's  favour  is  hostility  to  Prussia"  (12th 
May,  1859).  Further,  he  insisted  that  "  Prussia's  connec- 
tion with  the  '  Bund '  is  a  weakness  which  must  be  cured 
sooner  or  later  ferro  et  igni,  if  we  do  not  apply  timely 
remedies  ".  Recalled  from  the  Diet  in  1859  he  served  for 
three  years  as  ambassador  at  St.  Petersburg,  and,  in  1862, 
for  a  few  months,  at  Paris. 

When,  therefore,  in  1862  Bismarck  assumed  the  reins 
in  Prussia  he  was  intimately  acquainted  alike  with  the 
rottenness  of  the  existing  political  system  in  Germany 
and  with  the  main  currents  of  European  diplomacy.  In 
Paris  he  had  taken  the  measure  of  Napoleon  III.,  the  man 
with  whom  he  was  to  cross  swords,  and  whom  he  re- 
garded as  "half  dreamer  and  half  trickster". 

In  1863  the  Emperor  Francis  Joseph  proposed  a  con- 
ference of  the  sovereign  princes  of  Germany  to  discuss 
a  revision  of  the  Federal  Constitution.  Prussia,  on  Bis- 
marck's suggestion,  declined  the  invitation  on  the  ground 
that  the  "  Austrian  project  did  not  harmonise  with  the 
proper  position  of  the  Prussian  monarchy  or  with  the 


si 


in 


210         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

interests  of  the  German  people  ".    Austria  might  well  have 
taken  up  the  challenge  thus  thrown  down  but  for  the 
intervention  of  another  question  of  grave  significance. 
The  The  death  of  King  Frederick  VII.  of  Denmark  in  1863 

Schleswig-  ,  .      "  .  .  ... 

Hoistein  reopened  one  01  the  most  embarrassing  questions  in 
Question  Qerman  politics.  Frederick  was  not  only  King  of  Den- 
mark but  Duke  of  the  German  Duchies  of  Schleswig, 
Hoistein  and  Lauenburg.  His  death,  without  direct 
male  heirs,  dissolved  a  personal  union  between  Denmark 
and  the  Duchies  which  had  subsisted  since  1460.  Hoi- 
stein was  a  State  of  the  Germanic  Confederation  ;  Schles- 
wig was  indissolubly  united  to  Hoistein.  In  both  the 
Salic  law  survived.  Denmark  had  long  been  anxious 
for  the  complete  incorporation  of  the  Duchies  in  the 
monarchy ;  but  this  was  opposed  both  by  the  German 
Diet  and  by  the  Duke  Frederick  of  Augustenburg  who 
had  strong  claims  upon  the  Duchies  though  none  upon 
the  throne  of  Denmark.  Bismarck  perceived  their  enor- 
mous importance  to  the  naval  development  of  Prussia, 
and  was  determined  by  hook  or  by  crook  to  acquire  them 
for  his  master.  But  he  was  not  yet  strong  enough  to  do 
so  by  force  majeure,  and  he  determined  therefore  to  in- 
duce Austria  to  pull  the  chestnuts  out  of  the  fire  for  him. 
By  the  Treaty  of  London  (1852),  England  and  France 
had  guaranteed  "  the  territorial  integrity  of  Denmark," 
but  of  their  intervention  Bismarck  had  no  fear,  and  upon 
the  rest  of  the  parties  he  turned  the  tables  with  consum- 
mate adroitness.  In  1864  the  Duchies  were  by  the 
Treaty  of  Vienna  handed  over  to  Austria  and  Prussia 
conjointly.  But  what  was  to  be  done  with  them  ?  Bis- 
marck offered  to  recognise  Frederick  of  Augustenburg 
as  Duke  on  terms  which  would  have  meant  his  complete 
subjection  to  Prussia.  The  Duke  declined  the  terms ; 


THE  PRUSSIANISATION  OF  GERMANY  (1860-1870)     211 

Austria  protested  against  them,  and  things  looked  like 
war  between  the  two  great  German  Powers  when  a 
temporary  compromise  was  patched  up  at  Gastein  (1865). 
Prussia  was  to  occupy  Schleswig ;  Austria  was  to  occupy 
Holstein,  and  to  sell  Lauenburg  to  Prussia. 

The  Convention  of  Gastein  was  merely  a  makeshift.  Rupture 
To  Bismarck  it  was  valuable  only  as  a  means  of  enabling  Austria1 
him  to  fix  a  quarrel  upon  Austria.  In  January,  1866, 
complained  that  the  Austrians  were  encouraging — as  well 
they  might — the  "  pretensions  "  of  Frederick  of  Augusten- 
burg,  the  legitimate  heir.  Prussian  troops  were  accord- 
ingly poured  into  Holstein,  and  the  Austrians  were 
expelled.  To  avenge  this  outrage  upon  Austria  the 
German  Diet  ordered  a  mobilisation  of  the  federal  forces 
against  Prussia  (14th  June,  1866). 

This  was  precisely  what  Bismarck  wanted.  He  had 
not  only  been  spoiling  for  the  fight,  but  steadily  preparing 
for  it.  The  Prussian  army  had  been  re-armed  with  the 
needle-gun  and  brought  up  to  a  high  state  of  efficiency 
by  Von  Roon.  The  diplomatic  situation  was  favourable. 
Napoleon  III.  was  not  only  involved  in  his  disastrous 
Mexican  enterprise,  but  had,  in  1865,  been  won  over  to 
approval  of  Bismarck's  plans  by  a  personal  interview  at 
Biarritz.  Italy  had  been  similarly  secured  (8th  April, 
1866)  by  the  promise  of  Venetia  in  return  for  assistance 
against  Austria.1  Russia  was  friendly.  Bismarck  had 
indeed  "  counted  the  cost "  ;  Prussia  was  the  strong  man 
armed,  and  could  plunge  into  the  conflict,  confident  in  her 
might  if  not  in  her  right.  On  the  latter  point  Bismarck 
was  opposed  not  only  by  the  whole  of  Germany,  but  by 
the  Prussian  Parliament,  and  even  the  Prussian  King. 

1  See  p.  190. 


212         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

But  his  masterful   character  overbore   all  scruples  and 
overcame  all  difficulties. 

On  14th  June  the  Diet  at  Frankfort  rejected  a  scheme 
proposed  by  Bismarck  for  the  complete  reorganisation  of 
the  "  Bund  "  and  accepted  the  Austrian  motion  for  federal 
execution  against  Prussia.  The  Prussian  delegate  was 
thereupon  withdrawn.  The  States  threw  in  their  lot 
with  Austria.  A  war,  destined  to  be  the  most  fateful  in 
German  history,  was  the  inevitable  result. 

The  Seven  Prussia  declared  war  upon  Hanover,  Saxony  and  Hesse 
WarkS>  on  15th  June.  By  the  18th  her  troops  were  in  occupa- 
tion of  the  three  States.  On  the  18th  she  declared  war 
upon  the  other  members  of  the  "Bund,"  including 
Austria.  A  battle  at  Langensalza,  in  which  the  Hano- 
verians had  the  best  of  it  (27th  June),  was  followed 
(28th  June)  by  the  pusillanimous  surrender  of  the  Hano- 
verian army.  The  terms  of  the  capitulation  involved  the 
extinction  of  the  kingdom  of  Hanover  and  its  incorpora- 
tion in  Prussia.  Meanwhile  the  main  Prussian  army  had 
marched  to  meet  the  Austrians  in  Bohemia,  and  a  week's 
brilliant  campaign  culminated  on  3rd  July  in  the  crush- 
ing defeat  of  the  Austrians  at  Sadowa  (Koniggratz) ; 
before  the  end  of  the  month  the  Prussians  were  within 
striking  distance  of  Vienna;  terms  of  peace  were  ar- 
ranged on  the  26th ;  the  brief  but  decisive  war  was 
over. 

Treaty  of  The  definitive  treaty  was  signed  at  Prague  (2nd 
Prague  August,  1866).  Bismarck,  who  had  thought  out  every 
move  in  the  intricate  diplomatic  game,  had  already  de- 
cided to  secure  Austria's  friendship  in  the  greater 
struggle  still  ahead  of  Prussia.  Hence  the  terms  were 
made  as  lenient  as  possible,  consistent  with  the  attain- 
ments of  the  essential  object  of  the  war. 


THE  PKUSSIANISATION  OF  GERMANY  (1860-1870)    213 

Austria  lost  no  territory  (except  Venetia  to  Italy)  and  the  war  Dissolution 
indemnity  was  light,   but  she  was  excluded  henceforward  f rom  °f 
Germany.    The  "Bund  "  was  dissolved  after  an  inglorious  existence 
of  half  a    century ;    Hanover,   Hesse -Cassel,  Schleswig-Holstein, 
Lauenburg,  Nassau,  and  the  free  city  of  Frankfort-on-Main  were 
annexed  to  Prussia,  and  all  the  States  north  of  the  Main  were  to 
form  a  North  German  Confederation  under  the  Presidency   of 
Prussia.  • 

The  annexations  were  of  immense  significance.  For 
the  first  time  the  Hohenzollern  were  masters  of  continu- 
ous territory  stretching  from  the  Rhine  to  the  Baltic; 
they  gained  nearly  25,000  square  miles  of  territory  and 
5,000,000  subjects,  and  (in  Kiel)  a  magnificent  naval 
base. 

But  the  broad  result  of  the  Seven  Weeks'  War  lay  in 
the  exclusion  of  Austria  from  the  Germanic  body  and 
the  definite  acceptance  of  the  Prussian  hegemony  by  the 
States  north  of  the  Main. 

In  February,  1867,  an  Assembly  met  at  Berlin  re- North 
presentative  of  all  the  States  of  the  North  German  Con- 
federation;  Prussia,  Saxony,  the  Grand  Duchies  oftion 
Mecklenburg-Schwerin,  Mecklenburg-Strelitz,  Oldenburg 
and  Saxe-Weimar,  the  Duchies  of  Brunswick,  Anhalt, 
Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  the  free  cities  of  Hamburg,  Liibeck 
and  Bremen  with  smaller  Duchies  and  Principalities — 
twenty-two  in  all.  The  new  Constitution  was  there 
formally  approved.  The  executive  was  vested  in  the 
King  of  Prussia  as  hereditary  president,  assisted  by  a 
federal  chancellor ;  the  Legislature  was  to  consist  of  (i)  a 
Federal  Council  (Bundesrath) ,  consisting  of  plenipotenti- 
aries from  the  Constituent  States,  and  (ii)  a  Reichstag, 
elected  by  universal  suffrage.  There  was  to  be  compulsory 
military  service  throughout  the  Confederation  on  the 
Prussian  model.  The  princes  retained  certain  sovereign 


214         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

rights ;  they  might  still  summon  local  Estates,  levy  local 
taxes,  and  be  separately  represented  at  foreign  Courts, 
but  the  whole  conduct  of  foreign  affairs,  the  raising  and 
control  of  the  army,  and  the  decision  of  peace  and  war 
were  vested  in  the  President. 

But  even  this  did  not  represent  the  full  extent  of 
Prussia's  dominion  over  Germany.  The  chief  Southern 
States,  Bavaria,  Baden  and  Wiirtemberg,  concluded  a  Con- 
vention by  which  their  armies  were  placed  at  the  dis- 
posal of  Prussia  in  time  of  war,  and  in  1867  they  entered 
into  a  new  commercial  union  with  the  Northern  Con- 
federation. The  affairs  of  the  Zollverein  were  to  be  settled 
by  a  Customs  Parliament  sitting  in  Berlin  to  which  the 
Southern  as  well  as  the  Northern  States  were  to  send 
deputies. 

The  Prussianisation  of  Germany  was  all  but  complete. 
But  the  final  consummation  of  German  unity  was  to  be 
attained,  by  a  certain  dramatic  irony,  through  the  inter- 
vention of  the  hereditary  enemy,  who  was  even  now 
watching  with  extreme  jealousy  the  rapid  growth  of 
Hohenzollern  power.  The  relations  between  Napoleon  III. 
and  Bismarck  must,  however,  form  the  subject  of  a 
separate  chapter. 

Austria-         It  remains  to  notice  the  reorganisation  of  the  Habsburg 
?ary    dominions    after   the   events   of   1866.     Excluded   from 
Germany  and  expelled  from  Italy,  Austria  was  at  last 
compelled  to  come  to  terms  with  the  Hungarian  subjects 
who  had  been  reconquered  for  her  in  1849  by  Russian 
arms.     Many  experiments  had  been  tried  since  1849  but 
the  Magyars  refused  any  settlement  which  did  not  re- 
cognise the  independence  of  Hungary  and  the  equality 
The          of  the  two  Crowns.     In  1867  a  compromise  (Ausgleich) 
Ausgieich  was  j^^g^  jjy   ^he  labours  of  Count  Beust,  who  had 


THE  PRUSSIANISATION  OF  GERMANY  (1860-1870)    215 

transferred  his  services  from  Saxony  to  Austria,  and  the 
Hungarian  patriot  Francis  Deak.  By  this  "  dual  system  " 
the  two  Crowns  of  Austria  and  Hungary,  and  the  two 
Legislatures  were  henceforth  to  be  distinct,  while  affairs 
common  to  them  both — foreign  policy,  war  and  finance — 
were  to  be  controlled  by  common  ministers.  Each  Legis- 
lature was,  moreover,  to  appoint  a  "  Delegation  " — to  meet 
alternately  in  Vienna  and  Pesth — for  the  discussion  of 
affairs  common  to  the  two  parts  of  the  "  dual  Empire  ". 
The  system,  though  terribly  complicated,  has  worked 
with  tolerable  success,  thanks  to  the  political  and  personal 
tact  of  the  Emperor  Francis  Joseph.  But  that  the  prob- 
lems raised  by  the  racial  jealousies  of  the  many  peoples 
united  under  his  rule  have  been  finally  solved  no  observer 
of  contemporary  politics  would  venture  to  assert. 


CHAPTER  XX 

THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  THE  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR 

L'Empire  c'est  la  paix. — NAPOLEON  III. 

The  title  I  covet  most  is  that  of  an  honest  man. — NAPOLEON  III. 
Great  questions  are  not  to  be  solved  by  speeches  and  parlia- 
mentary votes  but  by  blood  and  iron. — BISMABCK. 

, r  \  SHE  circumstances  under  which  the  Second  French 

The  Second 

Empire  JL  Empire  came  to  the  birth  have  been  already 
described.1  In  a  speech  delivered  at  Bordeaux  in  Octo- 
ber, 1852,  Napoleon  had  clearly  defined  his  programme. 
The  revived  Napoleonic  Empire  would  stand  primarily 
for  peace.  "L'Empire,"  he  said  emphatically,  "c'est  la 
paix."  We  have  already  seen  how  far  that  promise  was 
fulfilled  during  the  first  decade  of  the  new  regime.  But 
if  the  Crimean  War  and  the  War  of  Italian  Independence 
falsified  promises,  they  were  not  without  compensations 
in  military  and  political  prestige.  No  such  compensation 
attached,  as  we  shall  see,  to  the  wars  of  the  second  period 
of  the  reign. 

But  the  Empire  was  to  stand  not  only  for  peace,  but 
for  social,  economic  and  moral  reform.  "  I,  like  the  Great 
Emperor,  have  many  conquests  to  make.  ...  I  wish  to 
conquer  to  religion,  to  morality,  to  prosperity,  that  part 
of  the  population,  still  so  numerous,  which,  in  the  midst 
of  a  country  of  faith  and  belief,  scarcely  knows  the  pre- 

1  Chap.  XIV. 
216 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  217 

cepts  of  Christ,  which,  in  the  heart  of  the  most  fertile 
country  in  the  world  can  scarcely  enjoy  the  prime  neces- 
sities of  its  produce.  We  have  immense  districts  of 
virgin  soil  to  clear,  roads  to  open,  harbours  to  dig,  rivers 
to  render  navigable,  canals  to  finish,  our  network  of 
railways  to  complete.  We  have,  opposite  Marseilles,  a 
vast  kingdom  to  assimilate  to  France.  We  have  all  our 
great  ports  of  the  West  to  bring  near  to  the  American 
Continent,  by  the  rapidity  of  the  communications  we  have 
yet  to  create.  .  .  .  Such  are  the  conquests  I  meditate, 
and  all  of  you  who  surround  me,  who  desire  like  myself 
the  welfare  of  our  country,  you  are  my  soldiers."  l 

In  this  respect  promises  were  not  wholly  unfulfilled.  Social 
The  emotions  of  the  strange  being  who  for  twenty  years 
controlled  the  destinies  of  France  were  genuine  though 
transient.  Napoleon  III.  had  a  real  interest  in  economic 
and  social  development,  and  during  the  first  ten  years  of 
his  reign  much  was  done  to  redeem  the  pledges  given  at 
Bordeaux.  The  forces  of  anarchy  were  repressed ;  social 
order  was  restored  ;  industry  was  encouraged  ;  everything 
was  done  to  improve  the  means  of  communication ;  rail- 
ways, canals  and  harbours  were  constructed  ;  banks  were 
established,  and  an  impulse  thereby  given  to  agriculture 
and  commerce;  Paris  was  rebuilt  and  rendered  more 
splendid  and  spacious  if  not  more  beautiful ;  schemes 
were  promoted  for  workmen's  dwellings,  for  insurance 
against  accidents  and  old  age ;  labour  combinations  were 
legalised ;  thrift  was  encouraged  by  benefit  and  co-opera- 
tive societies ;  industrial  exhibitions  were  organised,  and 
a  long  step  was  taken  towards  freedom  of  commercial 
intercourse  by  the  conclusion  of  the  Cobden  Treaty  with 
England  (1860).  France  had  indeed  surrendered  political 
1  Quoted  by  Dickinson. 


218         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

liberty,    but    the    ensuing    despotism    was    undeniably 
beneficent. 

Consti-  Between  1860  and  1870  several  steps  were  taken  to 
Reform  liberalise  the  Constitution.  The  ministers  continued 
(until  1869)  to  be  responsible  only  to  the  Emperor,  but 
the  Legislature  was  permitted  to  criticise  and  even, 
within  limits,  to  interrogate  them,  to  initiate  legislation 
and  to  publish  its  debates.  The  Empire  thus  ceased  to 
be  despotic;  unfortunately,  it  ceased  also  to  be  effic- 
ient. 

Foreign  The  verdict  of  history  may  pronounce  the  Crimean 
War  to  have  been  a  blunder,  but,  in  the  eyes  of  con- 
temporaries, it  enormously  enhanced  the  prestige  of  the 
French  Emperor.  France  undoubtedly  occupied  at  the 
Peace  of  Paris  (1856)  a  position  to  which  she  had  been  a 
stranger  since  the  fall  of  the  first  Napoleon.  History 
again  can  perceive  that  the  War  of  Italian  Independence 
gravely  accentuated  the  difficulties  of  Napoleon.  The 
annexation  of  the  Romagna  to  the  Italian  kingdom 
alienated  the  French  Clericals;  the  expulsion  of  the 
Bourbons  from  the  Two  Sicilies  further  estranged  the 
legitimists ;  while  the  absorption  of  Savoy  and  Nice  into 
France  aroused  the  distrust  of  Europe.  But  contempor- 
aries were  dazzled  by  the  military  achievements  of 
Magenta  and  Solferino,  and  by  the  territorial  aggran- 
disement of  France. 

It  needed  no  historical  research  to  detect  and  expose 
the  ruinous  folly  of  the  foreign  policy  of  the  second 
decade  of  the  reign. 

The  Anything   more   fatuous   than   Napoleon's   policy    in 

Adventure  regar<*  to  Mexico  it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive. 

The  Mexican  Republic  had  for  some  years  been  in  a 
state  of  chronic  disorder,  intensified  by  civil  war  between 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  219 

the  two  parties  into  which  its  politicians  were  divided. 
In  1861  the  republican  leader  Benito  Juarez  overthrew 
Miramon  who  represented  the  Clericals  and  Monarchists. 
Miramon  appealed  for  support  to  the  great  Catholic 
Powers  in  Europe,  and  in  this  appeal  Napoleon's  vivid 
and  fantastic  imagination  saw  an  opportunity  for  killing 
several  birds  with  one  stone.  He  determined  to  place  on 
the  throne  of  Mexico  the  Archduke  Maximilian,  brother  of 
the  Emperor  Francis  Joseph  of  Austria.  In  the  choice  of 
a  candidate  he  displayed  acumen.  Maximilian  was  not 
only  a  member  of  a  leading  Catholic  House,  but  was  the 
husband  of  the  Princess  Charlotte,  daughter  of  King 
Leopold  of  Belgium,  and  had  won  personal  reputation  as 
the  ruler  of  Lombardy  and  Venice.  His  promotion  to  an 
Imperial  throne  might  therefore  be  expected  to  gratify 
Habsburgs,  Saxe-Coburgs  and  Orleanists,  and  thus  soothe 
susceptibilities  roused  by  recent  French  diplomacy. 
French  Catholics  would  welcome  an  adventure  which  had 
something  of  the  crusading  spirit  about  it ;  the  Empress 
Eugenie  and  her  countrymen  would  rejoice  in  a  monarchical 
triumph  in  Mexico ;  English,  French  and  Spanish  com- 
mercial interests  would  be  served  by  the  restoration  of 
order  and  the  payment  of  debts. 

Juarez  gave  Napoleon  a  pretext  for  interference  byThe 
the  repudiation  of  the  Mexican  debt.     England,   Spain  Emperor 
and  France  agreed  to  enforce  payment,  and  a  joint  ex- 
pedition was  despatched  for  that  purpose  (January,  1862). 
But  as  soon  as  they  discovered  Napoleon's  ulterior  de- 
signs England  and  Spain  withdrew,  and  France  was  left 
alone  with  an  awkward  job  on  her  hands.    Forty  thousand 
French  troops  were  poured  into  Mexico ;  opposition  was 
crushed ;  an  assembly  of  Mexican  notables  was  induced 
to  elect  Maximilian  as  Emperor  (July,  1863),  and  in  May, 


220         THE  EEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

1864,  that  unfortunate  prince  arrived  to  take  possession 
of  his  throne. 

It  soon  became  obvious  that  his  throne  and  even  his 
person  was  safe  only  so  long  as  French  bayonets  sur- 
rounded him.  In  1865  the  bayonets  were  withdrawn. 
Napoleon  had  been  tempted  to  the  Mexican  adventure 
partly  by  the  prse-occupation  of  the  United  States  of 
America  (1861-65).  But  the  American  Civil  War  ended 
in  1865,  and  one  of  the  first  fruits  of  restored  unity  was 
an  order  to  Napoleon  to  evacuate  Mexico  and  a  refusal  to 
recognise  Maximilian.  Napoleon  obeyed  the  order  in 
1867,  and  Maximilian,  deserted  by  his  patron,  was  left 
to  confront  his  subjects.  After  a  short  but  brave  struggle 
he  was  taken  prisoner  and  shot. 

The  Mexican  tragedy  was  a  terrible  blow  to  the 
prestige  of  Napoleon,  and  contributed  largely  to  his 
downfall.  But  a  political  gambler  cannot  withdraw  from 
play  after  a  ruinous  loss.  The  Mexican  disaster  com- 
pelled Napoleon  to  stake  all  upon  a  last  desperate  throw. 
The  Franco-Prussian  War  was  the  inevitable  result. 
Luxem-  "The  French  Empire,"  says  Lord  Acton,  "was  im- 
perilled as  'much  as  the  Austrian  by  the  war  of  1866." 
"  It  is  France  which  has  been  conquered  at  Sadowa,"  said 
Marshal  Randon.  These  statements  point  to  an  im- 
portant truth.  The  rapidity  and  completeness  of  the 
Prussian  victories  in  1866  entirely  upset  the  calculations 
of  Napoleon.  He  had  watched  with  some  uneasiness 
the  growth  of  Hohenzollern  power.  But  in  1865  Bis- 
marck met  Napoleon  at  Biarritz  and  secured  his  benevolent 
neutrality  by  the  promise  of  compensation — perhaps  a 
Rhine  Province,  or  Luxemburg,  or  even  Belgium.  Napo- 
leon swallowed  the  bait  and  allowed  Prussia  to  make  her 
plans  for  the  overthrow  of  Austria.  But  he  was  dumb- 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  221 

founded  by  the  event.  Instead  of  coming  in  as  a  well- 
compensated  arbiter  at  the  close  of  a  long  conflict  he 
found  himself  a  humble  suitor  to  Bismarck  for  an  uncon- 
sidered  trifle.  The  Rhenish  Palatinate  was  his  first 
suggestion.  Bismarck  laughed  in  his  face  and  showed 
his  letter  to  Bavaria,  to  whom  the  Palatinate  belonged. 
The  request  served  only  to  .cement  a  Prusso-Bavarian 
Alliance.  A  demand  for  Belgium,  probably  stimulated 
by  Bismarck  himself,  had  no  better  result  for  Napoleon, 
but  served  Bismarck's  purposes  admirably.  Published 
to  the  world  in  1870  the  proposal  alienated  English 
sympathies  from  France.  Luxemburg  remained. 

The  Grand  Duchy  of  Luxemburg  was  peculiarly 
situated.  It  was  included  in  the  German  Confederation, 
ruled  by  the  King  of  Holland,  and  garrisoned  by  Prussia. 
Foiled  elsewhere  Napoleon  negotiated  with  the  King  of 
the  Netherlands  for  the  purchase  of  Luxemburg.  The 
King  was  willing,  but  Bismarck  demurred.  Neither 
France  nor  Prussia,  however,  was  quite  ready  for  war, 
and  the  question  was  settled  by  a  Conference  of  the 
Powers  in  London  (May,  1867).  By  the  Treaty  of 
London  the  Grand  Duchy  was  neutralised  under  Euro- 
pean guarantee;  the  King  of  Holland  retained  the 
sovereignty ;  the  fortifications  of  Luxemburg  itself  were 
demolished  and  the  Prussian  garrison  was  withdrawn. 
Napoleon's  last  chance  of  a  "  compensation  "  disappeared. 

He  now  tried  to  persuade  himself  and  his  friends  that 
no  "  compensation  "  was  really  necessary  ;  that  Germany 
was  weakened  rather  than  strengthened  by  the  events  of 
1866.  But  the  military  and  commercial  rapprochement 
between  Prussia  and  the  Southern  States  proved  the 
hollowness  of  such  professions. 

Meanwhile  things   were    going    badly   elsewhere   for 


222         THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Napoleon.  From  the  Italian  dilemma  no  escape  was 
possible.  To  abandon  Rome  meant  a  rupture  with  the 
French  Clericals;  to  retain  it  meant  the  forfeiture  of 
Italian  support  in  the  impending  struggle  with  Prussia. 
At  home  the  outlook  was  gloomy.  The  finances,  already 
embarrassed  by  profusion  and  corruption,  became  further 
involved  by  the  Mexican  fiasco ;  constitutional  conces- 
sions earned  little  gratitude ;  worst  of  all,  Napoleon's  own 
health  was  failing.  Prestige  must  at  all  costs  be  recovered 
in  the  interests  of  the  dynasty.  Would  anything  avail 
but  a  brilliantly  successful  war  ? 

The  A   pretext   for   war  was  found   in   the  Hohenzollern 

zoiiern       candidature  for  the  throne  of  Spain.     Having  got  rid  of 

tuTe^"    their  Queen  Isabella,  the  Spaniards  in  1869  declared  for  a 

Spain        Constitutional   Monarchy,   and   offered   their  throne   to 

Prince   Leopold   of   Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen.     Prince 

Leopold  hung  back ;  but  Bismarck  procured  a  renewal  of 

the  offer,  and  on  4th  July,  1870,  it  was  accepted  by  the 

Prince. 

Napoleon  immediately  (6th  July)  intimated  to  Prussia 
that  France  would  regard  the  accession  of  a  Hohenzollern 
to  the  throne  of  Spain  as  a  casus  belli,  and  on  12th  July 
Prince  Leopold,  at  his  own  instance,  revoked  his  accept- 
ance of  the  Crown.  Once  more  war  seemed  to  have 
been  averted,  but,  with  almost  incredible  fatuity,  Napoleon 
now  demanded  that  the  King  of  Prussia  should  not  merely 
express  formal  approval  of  Prince  Leopold's  revocation, 
but  should  also  promise  "  that  he  would  not  again  author- 
ise this  candidature  ".  This  rather  insolent  demand  was 
presented  to  the  King  at  Ems  by  Benedetti,  the  French 
ambassador  (13th  July).  The  King  declined  to  go  beyond 
his  approval  of  the  revocation. 

Bismarck's  chance  had  come.     He  had  been  patiently 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  223 

waiting  for  it  since  1866,  "That  a  war  with  France 
would  succeed  that  with  Austria  lay,"  in  his  judgment, 
"  in  the  logic  of  history  ".  That  such  a  war  was  the  one 
thing  needful  to  complete  and  consolidate  German  unity 
was  also  part  of  his  conviction.  That  it  might  restore 
to  Germany  Alsace  and  Lorraine,  unrightfully  withheld 
in  1815,  was  his  hope. 

Authorised  by  his  master  to  inform  the  ambassadors 
and  the  Press  of  the  events  which  had  passed  at  Ems, 
Bismarck,  after  consultation  with  Moltke  and  Roon,  did 
so  in  terms  which  were  designed  to  inflame  passions  both 
in  Paris  and  Berlin *  (14th  July).  It  certainly  fulfilled 
its  object.  The  Parisian  populace  demanded  war,  and 
the  Empress  Eugenie  and  the  Due  de  Gramont  pressed 
it  upon  the  Emperor  and  the  Cabinet.  Napoleon  was 
not  ready,  and  he  knew  it.  Bismarck  also  knew  it,  and 
precipitated  the  conflict  while  craftily  making  France 
appear  as  the  aggressor. 

The  French  declaration  of  war  reached  Berlin  on  19th 
July.  The  Prussian  preparations  were  complete.  Within 
three  weeks  Boon  poured  500,000  men  into  France,  and 
had  a  second  500,000  ready  to  replace  them  if  they  fell. 
On  20th  July  Bavaria  threw  in  her  lot  with  Prussia,  and 
on  2nd  August  the  war  began. 

France   was  without   allies.     There   had   been   much  The 
negotiation    between    Napoleon    and   the    Emperor 
Austria,    but   no    actual    treaty    had    been    concluded. War 
Napoleon  imagined  that  he  would  be  able  to  march  into 
South  Germany  as  a  liberator  and  that  Austria  would 

1  Bismarck's  part  in  precipitating  the  outbreak  of  war  has  been 
endlessly  discussed:  cf.  e.g.,  Acton,  Historical  Essays;  Rose, 
European  Nations;  Bismarck,  Reminiscences;  Ollivier,  U  Empire 
liberal. 


224         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

then  join  him.  In  both  expectations  he  was  disappointed. 
Bismarck  had  squared  Alexander  of  Russia  by  the  hint 
that  it  would  be  a  convenient  opportunity  to  tear  up  the 
Treaty  of  Paris  (1856).  Russia  in  return  kept  Austria 
quiet.  France  had  no  friends.  Germany  rose  as  one 
man. 

The  war  itself  was  short  and  sharp.  The  French 
soldiers  displayed  splendid  courage  and  dash,  but  they 
were  badly  led  and  hopelessly  outnumbered;  there 
was  no  organisation,  no  strategy,  no  supplies.  Mac- 
Mahon  was  defeated  at  Weissenburg  (4th  August)  by  the 
Crown  Prince  of  Prussia;  still  more  seriously  in  the 
bloody  encounter  at  Worth  (6th  August),  and  was  driven 
back  on  Chalons.  On  the  same  day  Prince  Frederick 
Charles  (the  "Red  Prince")  and  Steinmetz  drove  back 
the  French  under  General  Frossard  from  Spicheren  (6th 
August).  On  the  18th  the  Germans  won  the  battle  of 
Gravelotte,  and  Marshal  Bazaine,  who  commanded  the 
French,  shut  himself  up  in  Metz.  Leaving  Prince 
Frederick  Charles  to  blockade  Metz  the  Germans  ad- 
vanced, under  the  Crown  Prince,  on  Paris.  MacMahon, 
ordered  to  advance  from  Chalons  to  the  rescue  of  Bazaine 
at  Metz,  was  caught  with  his  fine  army  of  130,000  men 
by  the  Germans  at  Sedan  (1st  September).  The  French 
fought  with  splendid  but  fruitless  gallantry ;  they  were 
completely  outnumbered  and  outmanoeuvred,  and  on  2nd 
September  Napoleon  surrendered  to  the  King  of  Prussia. 
The  Emperor  himself  and  more  than  80,000  Frenchmen 
became  prisoners  of  war.  The  first  phase  of  the  war  was 
over ;  it  had  lasted  exactly  a  month. 

The  Third      The    military    disaster    at    Sedan   was    immediately 

Republic.    f0nowed  by  political  revolution  in  Paris.     The  Empire 

collapsed ;  the  Empress  fled  to  England,  and  a  Republic 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  225 

was  proclaimed  (4th  September,  1870).  A  "Government 
of  National  Defence  "  was  hastily  formed  under  General 
Trochu,  Governor  of  Paris,  Jules  Favre  and  Gambetta. 
Thiers  declined  office,  but  set  off  on  a  tour  to  the  European 
Courts  to  try  to  persuade  them  to  mediate  on  behalf  of 
France.  Towards  the  end  of  the  year  Bismarck  was 
seriously  afraid  that  intervention  might  rob  Germany 
of  some  of  the  fruits  of  the  war ;  but  his  plans  had  been 
laid  too  well,  and  Thiers's  efforts,  though  heroic,  were 
unavailing. 

It  was  hoped  that  Sedan  might  end  the  war;  but  The  Siege 
Bismarck's  determination  to  have  Alsace  and  Lorraine,0 
coupled  with  Favre's  note  to  the  Powers  declaring  that 
he  would  not  "yield  an  inch  of  French  soil,  nor  a  stone 
of  French  fortresses,"  rendered  its  prolongation  inevitable. 
On  20th  September  Paris  was  besieged  by  the  Crown 
Prince,  and  the  Republic  established  a  supplementary 
seat  of  Government  at  Tours.  Gambetta  escaped  from 
Paris  in  a  balloon  (7th  October),  assumed  a  virtual  dicta- 
torship and  set  himself  with  immense  energy  and  skill  to 
organise  the  national  defence.  The  first  necessity  was  to 
succour  the  beleaguered  capital.  But  on  llth  October  the 
Germans  defeated  the  army  of  the  Loire  and  occupied 
Orleans.  Meanwhile  two  crushing  blows  bef el  the  French 
arms  on  the  Eastern  frontier.  Strasburg,  after  a  fine 
resistance,  surrendered  on  28th  September,  and  a  month 
later  Bazaine,  with  shameful  pusillanimity  if  not  positive  Surrender 
treachery,  delivered  the  great  fortress  of  Metz,  together of 
with  150,000  men  and  immense  stores  into  the  hands  of 
the  enemy  (28th  October).  France  reeled  under  the 
shock  of  Bazaine's  treason,  but  Gambetta's  spirit  was 
unquenchable.  He  ordered  a  levee  en  masse  (2nd 
November),  and  a  vigorous  campaign  on  the  Loire  created 
15 


226         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

in  November  and  December  some  diversion.  Orleans  was 
recaptured  (9th  November)  and  a  desperate  attempt  was 
made  to  relieve  Paris.  But  both  on  the  South  and  on  the 
North  the  Germans  repelled  all  attacks  and  gradually 
closed  in  upon  the  capital ;  a  final  sortie  failed  on  21st  Janu- 
ary, 1871,  and  on  the  28th  Paris  capitulated  An  armistice 
was  granted  to  permit  the  election  of  a  National  Assembly 
which  met  at  Bordeaux  (12th  February)  and  elected 
Thiers  Head  of  the  State.  Preliminaries  of  peace  were 
signed  on  26th  February  and  finally  ratified  at  Frankfort 
on  10th  May. 

Peace  of  France  ceded  to  Germany  the  whole  of  Alsace  (except  Belfort), 

Frankfort    and  Eastern  Lorraine,  together  with  the  great  fortresses  of  Metz 

and  Strassburg,  and  agreed  to  pay  an  indemnity  of  five  milliards  of 

francs   within  three  years.      German  troops   were  to  be  left  in 

occupation  until  the  indemnity  was  paid. 

The  Paris  Thanks  to  the  astonishing  recuperative  power  displayed 
Commune  ^y  prance  an(j  to  the  patriotism  of  her  thrifty  citizens  the 
indemnity  was  paid  before  the  stipulated  day,  and  her  soil 
was  freed  from  the  foreigner.  But  political  did  not  keep 
pace  with  financial  recovery.  Even  while  the  Germans 
were  at  the  gates  an  attempt  had  been  made  in  Paris  to 
overthrow  the  Government  of  National  Defence  (31st 
October,  1870).  Hardly  were  the  preliminaries  of  peace 
signed  before  the  revolutionary  forces,  always  near  the 
surface  in  Paris,  broke  loose,  and  the  Hotel  de  Ville  was 
seized  (18th  March)  by  a  mob  consisting  partly  of  fanatics 
but  chiefly  of  the  ordinary  Parisian  canaille.  The 
National  Guard  had  been  permitted  to  retain  their  arms 
when  the  rest  of  the  garrison  surrendered ;  the  troops 
fraternised  with  them  and  shot  their  commanders ;  Thiers 
and  the  Chamber  withdrew  to  Versailles,  and  Paris  was 
handed  over  to  an  insurrectionary  Commune  elected  on 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  227 

26th  March.  The  situation  was  curious.  The  German 
flag  still  waved  over  St.  Denis :  the  tricolour  over  Ver- 
sailles :  the  red  flag  of  the  Commune  over  Paris  itself.  The 
Government  were  now  compelled  to  reconquer  the  capital 
if  France  was  not  to  be  dissolved  in  anarchy.  Between  2nd 
April  and  21st  May,  1871,  Paris  suffered  a  second  siege 
far  more  horrible  and  destructive  than  the  first.  Terrible 
atrocities  were  committed  on  both  sides,  and  when,  after 
six  weeks'  siege,  the  Government  were  again  masters  of 
Paris,  they  found  the  city  in  ruins  and  in  flames.  The 
insurgents  were  ruthlessly  shot  down;  10,000  persons 
were  exiled  or  imprisoned,  and  gradually  public  order 
was  restored  ;  but  not  for  four  years  was  the  Republic  The  Third 
definitely  established.  Thiers  was  elected  President  on  RePublic 
31st  August,  1871,  and  held  office  until  1873.  To  him 
France  owes  the  restoration  of  her  credit,  financial  and 
political ;  the  reorganisation  of  her  military  system  on  the 
basis  of  universal  service,  and  the  establishment  of  the 
Third  Republic. 

In  1873  Thiers  was  succeeded  by  Marshal  MacMahon 
— a  pronounced  monarchist;  but  the  anti-republicans, 
though  in  a  majority  in  the  Chamber,  were  hopelessly 
divided  among  themselves.  Napoleon  III.  died  in  Eng- 
land in  1873,  and  six  years  later  his  dynasty  ended  with 
the  death  of  the  young  Prince  Imperial  in  South  Africa 
(1879).  Between  the  legitimists  and  the  Orleanists 
there  was  perpetual  discord.  The  Comte  de  Chambord, 
as  representing  the  legitimists,  refused  to  abate  one  jot  of 
his  pretensions,  or  to  part  with  one  of  his  prejudices,  even 
though  the  price  of  obstinacy  were  to  be  the  perpetual 
exclusion  of  his  house  from  the  throne  of  France.  Under 
these  circumstances  the  moderates  of  all  parties  agreed  to 
the  establishment  of  a  Conservative  Republic  in  1875. 


228         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

There  was  to  be  a  President  elected  by  a  National  As- 
sembly for  a  term  of  seven  years,  and  advised  by  a 
Cabinet  of  ministers  responsible  to  the  Chambers.  Thus 
the  French  at  last  abandoned  their  old  prejudices  in 
favour  of  a  division  between  the  executive  and  Legislature 
and  adopted  the  Cabinet  system  of  England.  The  Legis- 
lature was  vested  in  two  Chambers :  a  Senate  of  300 
members  elected  for  nine  years  by  a  process  of  double 
election  ;  and  a  Chamber  of  Deputies  elected  by  universal 
suffrage  for  four  years.  Admittedly  provisional  in  many 
of  its  details  the  Constitution  of  1875  has  already  had  a 
longer  life  than  any  Constitution  of  the  nineteenth 
century  in  France ;  and  under  it,  despite  periodic  unrest, 
France  has  settled  down  at  home  and  regained  a  great 
position  abroad. 

German  But  ^ne  destruction  of  the  Second  Empire  and  the 
Unity  establishment  of  the  Third  Republic  were  not  the  most 
significant  results  of  the  Franco-German  War.  That 
must  be  found  in  the  fact  that  it  placed  the  coping-stone 
upon  the  edifice  of  German  unity,  and  hardly  less  directly 
upon  that  of  Italy. 

Napoleon's  primary  purpose  in  plunging  into  war  was 
to  arrest  the  progress  of  Prussia  and  to  prevent  the  uni- 
fication of  Germany.  Bismarck  welcomed  and  precipi- 
tated war  in  the  conviction  that  only  war  with  France 
was  needed  to  crown  his  life-work.  And  Bismarck  calcu- 
lated while  Napoleon  guessed.  Had  the  Southern  States 
been  disposed  to  hang  back,  the  revelation  of  Napoleon's 
negotiations  for  the  Palatinate  would  have  convinced  them 
of  the  hollowness  of  his  friendship.  There  was  no  hang- 
ing back  in  1870.  The  whole  Teutonic  folk  were  united 
against  the  foe  who  had  laboured  for  three  centuries  to 
keep  Germany  divided  and  impotent. 


THE  SECOND  EMPIRE  AND  FRANCO-GERMAN  WAR  229 

With  dramatic  irony  the  Hall  of  Mirrors  in  the  palace  The 
of  Versailles  was  selected  for  the  scene  of  the  formal  pro-  Empire 
clamation  of  German  unity.  The  terms  of  union  had 
been  already  settled  between  Prussia  and  the  Southern 
States — Baden,  Wiirtemberg,  Hesse  Jand  Bavaria — and  had 
been  ratified  by  the  Diet  of  the  North  German  Con- 
federation. On  18th  January,  1871,  King  William  of 
Prussia  was  formally  proclaimed  first  German  Emperor 
at  Versailles.  The  old  King  accepted  the  Imperial 
Crown  as  the  gift  not  of  the  German  people,  but  of  his 
fellow  princes.  Three  months  later  the  new  Constitu- 
tion was  promulgated  (16th  April,  1871).  The  North 
German  Confederation  was  enlarged  to  include  all  the 
German  States  south  of  the  Main  (except  German 
Austria),  and  was  transformed  into  a  Federal  Empire 
under  the  hereditary  presidency  of  the  Prussian  King. 
The  Emperor,  assisted  by  an  Imperial  Chancellor,  re- 
sponsible only  to  himself,  controls  the  executive,  while 
the  Legislature  is  vested  in  a  Federal  Council  (Bundes- 
rath)  representing  the  sovereign  princes,  and  a  Reichstag 
elected  for  five  years  by  universal  suffrage  to  represent 
the  people.  Thus  was  Bismarck's  great  task  accom- 
plished :  the  Prussianisation  of  Germany  was  complete. 

Doubts  have  been  expressed  whether  the  German 
Empire  will  endure.  It  has  even  been  suggested  that  in 
1860  the  Second  Empire  seemed  as  firmly  established  in 
France  as  the  Hohenzollern  Empire  in  Germany  to-day. 
There  is  no  parallel  between  them.  The  Bonapartist 
Empire  was  born  in  dishonour,  cradled  in  corruption 
and  perished  in  political  penury.  The  modern  German 

1  i.e.,  Hesse,  south  of  the  Main.  In  respect  of  his  territory  north 
of  the  Main  the  Grand  Duke  of  Hesse  was  a  member  of  the  North 
German  Confederation. 


230         THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Empire  represents  the  long-delayed  consummation  of  an 
historical  evolution ;  its  institutions  correspond  to  a 
genuine  national  necessity.  It  is  the  Prussian  monarchy 
which  has  made  Germany,  and  Germany  gratefully 
realises  the  fact.  The  constituent  States  have  lost 
something  of  their  dignity  and  importance,  but  much  less 
than  is  commonly  supposed ;  and  if  they  sometimes 
resent  Prussia's  overbearing  methods,  they  are  forced  to 
acknowledge  the  solid  advantages  they  derive  from  the 
union.  That  union  is  founded  upon  community  of  in- 
terest, of  language,  of  race  and  of  historical  tradition. 
Resting  on  such  solid  foundations  it  is  not  likely  to  be 
shaken. 


T 


CHAPTER  XXI 

AFTERWORD 

HE   year  1870-71  is  the  culminating  point  of  thecompie- 
political    history  of   the  nineteenth  century.     It  workof  the 


witnessed  in  France  the  collapse  of  the  last  of  the 
monarchical  experiments  and  the  establishment  of  the 
Republic  on  foundations  which  have  weathered  many 
storms  and  have  endured  for  thirty-five  years.  It  wit- 
nessed the  transference  of  the  Italian  capital  from  Florence 
to  Rome  and  the  consummation  of  the  nationality  move- 
ment in  Italy.  It  witnessed  the  transformation  of  the 
North  German  Confederation  into  the  German  Empire 
and  the  consequent  completion  of  German  unity.  It  saw 
Russia  reopen  the  Eastern  Question  by  the  abrogation  of 
the  Treaty  of  Paris,  and  heard  the  promulgation  of  the 
doctrine  of  Papal  infallibility  by  the  Vatican  Council 
(18th  July,  1870).  To  carry  the  narrative  beyond  that 
point  would  be  to  confuse  the  issue  and  to  court  the 
dangers  of  an  an  ti-  climax. 

The  nineteenth  century  had  accomplished,  in  Europe, 
its  characteristic  work.  The  last  thirty  years  have 
witnessed  steady  development  and  consolidation.  But 
the  development  has  taken  place  on  lines  clearly  defined 
in  1870;  there  has  been  no  fresh  departure,  no  breach 
of  continuity,  no  great  territorial  readjustment.  The 

231 


*fl^800- 


232         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

modifications  in  the  frontiers  of  Turkey1  and  Greece; 
the  cession  of  Cyprus  by  Turkey  to  England  (1878)  and 
of  Heligoland  by  England  to  Germany  (1890),  and  the 
severance  of  Norway  from  Sweden  (1905) — these  repre- 
sent the  chief  changes  in  the  map  of  Europe  between 
1870  and  the  present  time. 

The  really  significant  changes  are  to  be  looked  for 
beyond  the  boundaries  of  Europe,  and  in  the  relation  of 
the  European  Powers  to  questions  of  world-politics. 

In  the  last  thirty  years  Science  has  done  much  to 
annihilate  space  and  time.  The  marvellous  improvement 
in  the  means  of  communication  and  of  transportation  has 
caused  a  real  shrinkage  in  the  size  of  the  world.  London 
and  Vancouver  are  now  for  all  practical  purposes  as  near 
each  other  as  were  London  and  Edinburgh  in  1815. 
Calcutta  is  hardly  further  from  the  capital  of  the  Empire 
than  was  Dublin  at  the  time  of  the  Union.  As  a  result, 
the  centre  of  political  gravity  has  shifted ;  Africa,  America 
Asia  and  Australia  have  begun  to  react  upon  Europe ;  the 
Chancelleries  have  to  take  account  of  extra-European 
States,  and  the  mutual  relations  of  the  Powers  themselves 
have  been  sensibly  modified. 

No  country  has  been  so  much  affected  by  this  revolu- 
tion in  the  conditions  of  world-politics  as  Great  Britain. 
The  scope  of  this  volume  forbids  any  detailed  reference 
either  to  the  foreign  or  the  colonial  policy  of  Great 
Britain,  but  no  survey,  however  summary,  would  be  com- 
plete which  failed  to  notice  the  expansion  of  Britain  in 
the  nineteenth  century. 

1  British     At  the  opening  of  the  century  the  British  Crown  ruled 
'Soo  over  *ess  ^an  na^  as  many  subjects  (20,000,000)  as  are 
now  contained  in  the  British  Isles  alone.     It  now  rules 

1  See  Chap.  xiii. 


234         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

over  nine  times  as  many.  (Empire  =  394,553,581 :  British 
Isles  =  42,372,556.)  In  point  of  size  the  Empire  which  at 
the  beginning  of  the  century  was  only  twelve  times  as  big 
as  the  United  Kingdom  is  now  ninety-one  times  as  big : 
in  other  words,  His  Majesty  King  Edward  VII.  rules 
over  one  United  Kingdom  in  Europe  and  ninety  others 
scattered  over  the  face  of  the  globe.  (Area:  U.K., 
121,027  square  miles:  British  Empire,  11,516,821.)  Of 
the  details  of  this  marvellous  transformation  only  a 
bare  summary  can  be  attempted. 

India  When   Lord   Wellesley   became   Governor-general    of 

India  in  1798,  we  had  hardly  done  more  than  lay  the 
foundations  of  the  Indian  Empire  of  to-day,  though  they 
were  laid  secure  in  the  possession  of  Bengal,  Madras  and 
Bombay.  Lord  Wellesley  changed  the  map  of  India. 
The  North- Western  Provinces  were  brought  under  British 
rule  by  the  campaigns  of  Lord  Lake ;  the  third  Mysore 
war  (1799)  gave  us  the  Carnatic  and  Tanjore,  and  consti- 
tuted the  Madras  Presidency  practically  as  it  exists  to- 
day;  while  the  acquisition  of  Orissa  (1804)  linked  up 
Madras  with  Bengal.  Since  Lord  Wellesley's  day  we 
have  added  the  Himalayan  districts  (1815),  the  Mahratta 
territories  (1818),  Sindh  (1843),  and  the  Punjab  (1849), 
not  to  speak  of  Assam  (1826),  and  Lower  and  Upper 
Burmah  (1852  and  1886). 

Canada  Canada,  in  1800,  consisted  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
of  the  two  provinces  of  Ontario  and  Quebec,  with  their 
western  frontier  resting  on  the  great  lakes.  The  opening 
out  of  the  North-West  has  been  the  work  of  the  last  half 
century.  When  the  Federal  Dominion  was  constituted  in 
1867  it  was  composed  only  of  four  provinces,  Quebec, 
Ontario,  Nova  Scotia  and  New  Brunswick.  Manitoba 
joined  it  in  1870,  British  Columbia  in  1871,  Prince 


AFTERWORD  235 

Edward  Island  in  1873  and  the  North-West  Provinces  in 
1897,  the  latter  having  since  been  organised  into  the  two 
provinces  of  Alberta  and  Saskatchewan  (1905).  To  bind 
the  East  and  West  together  in  commercial  no  less  than 
political  bonds  the  project  of  a  trans-continental  railway 
was  inaugurated  in  1881.  The  work  was  pushed  on  with 
remarkable  vigour  and  rapidity,  and  the  Canadian  Pacific 
( Railway  was  opened  in  1886.  The  great  railway,  running  The  c  P  R 
from  Montreal  to  Vancouver — a  distance  of  2,909  miles — 
is  perhaps  the  most  important  imperial  enterprise  of  our 
time.  On  strategic  as  well  as  commercial  and  political 
grounds  it  is  likely  to  prove  of  the  highest  value.  Thanks 
to  the  existence  of  the  Canadian  Pacific  Railway  it  is 
now  possible  to  reinforce  with  supplies  and  men  a  * 
squadron  at  Vancouver  from  Great  Britain  in  fourteen 
days,  and  a  squadron  on  the  China  Station  in  twenty- 
five. 

Passing  from  the  Northern  to  the  Southern  hemisphere  Australasia 
a  not  less  remarkable  development  is  witnessed.  In 
1800  the  only  British  subjects  in  Australasia  were  the 
members  of  a  convict  settlement  on  the  coast  of  New 
South  Wales.  In  1821  New  South  Wales  was  opened  to 
free  immigrants,  and  from  that  moment  steady  though 
slow  progress  was  made.  Van  Diemen's  Land  (now  Tas- 
mania) was  separated  from  New  South  Wales  in  1825, 
and  settlements  were  effected  in  Queeensland  in  1826,  in 
Western  Australia  (1829),  in  Victoria  (1836),  and  in  New 
Zealand  (1840).  In  1900  the  five  Australian  Colonies 
united  into  a  Federal  Commonwealth.  Such  was  the 
transformation  witnessed  in  the  course  of  the  century  in 
the  Southern  Seas. 

From  Australasia  we  pass  to  South  Africa.     Occupied  gouth 
in   the  name  of   the   Stadtholder   of   Holland  in  1795Africa 


236      THE  REMAKING  OF  MODEKN 

Cape  Colony  was,  as  we  have  seen,1  handed  back  in 
1802,  reconquered  in  1806,  and  finally  purchased  from 
the  Dutch  in  1814.  But  though  transferred  to  the 
British  flag  the  population  of  Cape  Colony  was  still  ex- 
clusively Dutch.  Not  until  1820  did  British  immigra- 
tion make  a  start.  Almost  from  the  first  there  were 
difficulties  between  the  British  and  the  Dutch  settlers. 
The  emancipation  of  the  slaves  (1833)  brought  things  to  a 
crisis,  and  between  1836  and  1840  some  10,000  Boer 
farmers  shook  the  dust  of  British  control  off  their  feet 
and  "  trekked  "  into  the  great  regions  beyond  the  Orange 
and  Vaal  rivers.  Meanwhile  a  handful  of  British  settlers 
established  themselves  at  Port  Natal  (1824),  and  after 
some  hesitation  on  the  part  of  the  Home  Government  Natal 
was  declared  a  British  colony  in  1843.  In  regard  to  the 
Boers  who  had  trekked  to  the  North-East  the  British 
Government  pursued  a  policy  of  lamentable  incon- 
sistency. In  1848  the  sovereignty  of  the  Queen  was 
proclaimed  over  the  whole  district  between  the  Orange 
and  Vaal  rivers.  In  1852  the  Government  recognised,  by 
the  Sand  River  Convention,  the  independence  of  the 
Boers  to  the  north  of  the  Vaal,  and  in  1854,  by  the 
Bloemfontein  Convention,  that  of  the  Boers  to  the  south 
of  it.  Thus  the  Orange  Free  State  was  added  to  the 
Transvaal.  In  1877  the  Transvaal  was  annexed ;  re-ceded 
in  1881,  and  conquered  and  re-annexed,  together  with  the 
Orange  Free  State,  in  1902. 

Meanwhile  the  sovereignty  of  Great  Britain  was  being 
rapidly  extended  over  other  portions  of  Africa.  East 
Africa,  ruled  by  a  Chartered  Company  from  1888,  was 
taken  over  by  the  Crown  in  1895,  and  Nigeria — a  great 

>P.  130. 


AFTERWORD  237 

district  on  the  West  Coast — after  similar  apprenticeship, 
was  taken  over  in  1900. 

But  while  British  supremacy  was  steadily  extending 
throughout  Southern,  Eastern,  Western  and  Central 
Africa,  events  of  even  greater  significance  were  taking 
place  on  its  Northern  shores. 

For  the  last  four  hundred  years  the  Eastern  Mediter-  Egypt  and 
ranean — once  the  great  waterway  of  commerce — had 
sunk  into  the  position  of  a  mere  backwater.  Trade  had 
deserted  its  shores  for  those  of  the  Atlantic.  The 
Ottoman  conquest  of  Constantinople  (1453)  and  Egypt 
(1516)  had  effectually  blocked  the  old  commercial  routes, 
and  the  discovery  of  the  new  route  to  India  by  the  Cape 
of  Good  Hope  (1498)  completed  the  ruin  which  Turkish 
conquest  had  begun.  The  decline  of  Turkish  power  in 
the  eighteenth  century  and  the  contest  between  England 
and  France  for  supremacy  in  India  again  recalled  atten- 
tion to  the  importance  of  the  Eastern  Mediterranean. 
Napoleon's  attack  on  Egypt1  was  a  significant  hint 
that  he  appreciated  its  importance  in  relation  to  European 
supremacy  in  Asia.  Nicholas  I.  was,  as  we  have  seen,2 
equally  alive  to  England's  interest  in  Egypt.  In  1869 
the  Suez  Canal  was  opened,  and  immediately  the  Mediter- 
ranean regained  much  of  the  importance  it  had  lost. 
Disraeli  showed  his  shrewd  appreciation  of  the  new 
situation  when  in  1875  he  purchased  the  shares  of  the 
Khedive  in  the  Suez  Canal,  and,  in  1878,  acquired  Cyprus. 
The  purchase  of  the  Canal  shares  marked  the  beginning 
of  a  new  policy.  In  1876  England  and  France  established 
in  Egypt  a  joint  financial  control  which  quickly  developed 
into  political  control.  But  in  1882  France  declined  to 
join  England  in  repressing  the  rebellion  of  Arabi  Pasha ; 

i  See  p.  64.  2p.  166. 


238         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

England  undertook  the  work  single-handed,  and  in  1883 
she  established  a  "  veiled  protectorate  "  which  has  practi- 
cally developed  into  a  permanent  occupation  of  Egypt. 
In  the  same  year  troubles  broke  out  in  the  Sudan  which 
led,  after  many  sacrifices  and  vicissitudes,  to  the  conquest 
of  the  Sudan  (1898).  Thus  Great  Britain  is  now  in  all 
but  continuous  occupation  of  Africa  from  Cairo  to  Cape 
Town,  the  continuity  being  broken  only  by  German  East 
Africa. 

This  summary  treatment  of  India,  Australia,  North 
America  and  Africa  by  no  means  exhausts  the  tale  of 
British  expansion  in  the  nineteenth  century,  expansion 
which  has  brought  one-fifth  of  the  whole  area  of  the 
world  under  British  rule. 

Colonial  But  not  less  important  than  territorial  expansion  has 
govern-  been  the  constitutional  evolution  of  the  British  Colonial 
ment  Empire.  The  two  Canadas  acquired  in  1791  representa- 
tive Legislatures,  but  without  executives  responsible  to 
them.  On  the  advice  of  Lord  Durham,  whose  famous 
Report  of  1839  is  a  landmark  in  colonial  history,  Re- 
sponsible Government  was  granted  to  Canada  in  1840, 
and  at  the  same  time  the  two  Canadas  (Ontario  and 
Quebec)  were  united.  Self-government  worked  well, 
but  union  did  not,  and  in  1867  by  the  British  North 
America  Act  the  four  provinces  of  Ontario,  Quebec, 
Nova  Scotia  and  New  Brunswick  were  formed  into  a 
Federal  Dominion.  Other  provinces  have  since  joined 
it.1 

The  example  of  Canada  fired  the  Australasian  Colonies. 
Between  1850  and  1890  the  several  Colonies  of  Australia 
and  New  Zealand  were  admitted  to  the  privileges  of  Self- 
government,  and  in  1900  the  Australian  Colonies  united 

'Seep.  234. 


AFTERWORD  239 

in  a  Federal  Commonwealth  on  the  Canadian  model. 
Similarly  in  South  Africa  :  Responsible  Government  was 
granted  to  Cape  Colony  in  1872,  to  Natal  in  1893  and  to 
the  recently  annexed  Transvaal  and  Orange  River  Colonies 
in  1906  and  1907  respectively.  It  can  hardly  be  doubted 
that  the  South  African  Colonies  will,  before  long,  follow 
the  example  of  the  North  American  and  Australian 
Colonies  and  unite  in  some  form  of  federation. 

The  extraordinary  growth  of  the  British  Empire  has 
been  the  chief  factor  in  the  shrinkage  of  the  world.  It 
has  also  excited,  not  unnaturally,  similar  aspirations  on 
the  part  of  other  European  Powers. 

Down  to  1870  Germany  and  Italy  were  too  fully  World- 
occupied  with  the  task  of  internal  unification  to  givep01 
heed  to  world-politics.  France  also  was  busy  throughout 
the  century  with  domestic  revolutions.  But  the  comple- 
tion of  German  and  Italian  unity,  and  the  secure  es- 
tablishment of  the  French  Republic  have  been  followed 
by  excursions  into  world -politics.  Thus  in  1881  France 
established  a  "protectorate"  over  Tunis,  and  subse- 
quently annexed  that  country.  In  1884  the  same  power 
compelled  China  to  recognise  her  protectorate  over 
Anam  and  Tonkin,  and  in  1893,  taking  advantage  of  the 
Russian  Alliance,  France  enlarged  the  boundaries  of  her 
Indo-Chinese  provinces  until  they  met  our  own  to  the 
north  of  Siam.  Russia  had,  of  course,  long  been  active 
not  only  in  Persia,  but  in  the  "farther  East,"  and  in 
1898  obtained  a  "lease"  of  Port  Arthur  from  China. 
Germany  at  the  same  time  obtained  a  "  lease "  of  Kiao- 
chau,  France  of  Kwang-chau-wan,  and  Great  Britain  of 
Wei-hai-wei.  Germany,  meanwhile,  had  in  1884  de- 
finitely embarked  upon  a  policy  of  colonial  expansion  in 
Africa,  and  in  1890  concluded  a  treaty  with  Great  Britain 


240         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

delimiting  the  boundaries  of  the  German  Colonies  in  East 
and  South-West  Africa. 

U.S.A.  These  bare  facts  are  sufficiently  indicative  of  the  change 

coming  over  world-politics  ;  but  more  significant  still  was 
the  war  between  the  United  States  and  Spain  and  the 
results  following  thereon  (1898).  Hitherto  the  United 
States,  while  warning  off  the  European  Powers  from  in- 
terference on  the  American  Continent,  had  carefully 
abstained  from  anything  which  might  involve  them  in 
the  complications  of  a  foreign  policy.  The  occupation 
of  Cuba  and  the  annexation  of  the  Philippines  announced 
to  the  world  a  new  departure.  Henceforward  the  United 
States  was  to  be  reckoned  among  the  "  Powers,"  a  fact 
further  emphasised  by  their  participation  in  the  Hague 
Conferences  and  in  the  international  expedition  organised 
for  the  suppression  of  the  Boxer  insurrection  in  China  in 
1900.  It  is  noticeable  that  in  the  mixed  contingent 
which  in  that  year  marched  to  Pekin,  Japanese  troops 
also  were  to  be  found  side  by  side  with  the  forces  of  the 
European  Powers. 

The  It  would  be  out  of  place  to  do  more  than  hint  at  these 

Printipielty  significant  events.  They  obviously  herald  the  approach 
of  a  new  era  in  world  history.  They  mark  not  so  much 
the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century  as  the  dawn  of  the 
twentieth.  The  period  with  which  this  book  is  concerned 
historically  ended  with  the  great  events  of  1870-71.  Pass- 
ing reference  has  been  made  to  some  subsequent  events 
simply  for  the  purpose  of  throwing  into  bolder  relief  the 
characteristic  work  of  the  nineteenth  century.  That 
work  consisted  in  the  revelation  of  the  potent  force  of 
nationality  as  a  principle  of  unification  and  a  principle  of 
disruption.  Liberated  by  the  French  Revolution  and 
emphasised  by  the  Napoleonic  wars,  that  principle  found 


AFTERWORD  241 

its  most  conspicuous  illustration  in  the  unification  of  Ger- 
many and  Italy ;  in  the  quickening  of  dead  bones  in  the 
provinces  subject  to  the  rule  of  the  Turk ;  and  above  all, 
perhaps,  in  the  movement  towards  the  political  unifica- 
tion of  the  British  race  scattered  in  a  hundred  homes 
throughout  the  world. 

That  is  the  principle  which  gives  unity  and  coherence 
to  the  myriad  phenomena  of  the  period  under  review. 
At  first  sight  diverse,  unrelated,  and  even  contradictory, 
they  are  seen  to  obey  a  definite  political  law.  In  obedi- 
ence to  that  law,  during  the  last  hundred  years,  modern 
Europe  has  been  remade. 


16 


*  *  » 

A 

5  M-3"|" 

M.  i; 

f3    g<«O                o    a 
^  ^  °°             Q  ^ 

J   0   3^ 

j-5  g^ 

°  2 

i                      1* 

.a          | 

<u 

'3 
H         |> 

1          1 

o 

3 

So 

1 

ll 

<J         5 

tir> 

II  

a4 

p 

M      PL, 

K   2     s 
3  §     3 

M     pp        r?  

.2   '           S, 

CJ                               7J 

J        1 

si       ^ 

h-l 

1—  1 
1—  I 

III 

&,£   rH 

e3   «o 

PH                | 
m 

o  w 

II  .2 

§ 

"3                    P| 

flN 

1 

o      •§ 

§ 

W       J 

|| 

o 

^.f  ^^  o 

IS 

o 

n 

S                            13  °° 

•3  . 

1                              §1 

2 

l 

C^  O 
II 

0 

fl 
«W     ^          <B 

s* 

—  &  «>•§  S  _!g 

i 

Q      »S        *^         *                      <p 

3 

»-»  W  ^  ^      N 

^ 

243 


s 


^ 

2 

« 

1      I. 

TH                ®  r-J         ®  CO           ..C^ 

CQ 

*0 

~  »H           <u  "           5 

£ 

<3 

1 

S^   |-s  ^^ 

H 

a 

s 

0 

O 

ODCO 


M         HH 

oa    b3 


0 
Jz; 


CO 

O 
5z; 

HH 

M 

55 
O 
« 
« 
p 


.2  -O 
O 


» 

13  .»-§  ^"s-g  IS  .§o 


^ 
ft 


-IfiRi'      -g| 

^  o  «  §       —  I  g 


"§• 


244 


.2  « 


•8 

Is 


* 

,—  0  rH 

1  N 


t^ 

I*8  .2  08 


« 

s 


PQ 
<5 

w 


I 

p 

§ 


2 
3g 

2i 


Hge, 


Rainer, 
Viceroy  of 
Lombardy, 
ob.  1853. 


-S" 

.S     04 

s 


. 


-Is- 


00*00 


a  .JOB 

-§2" 

§2 


l 


245 


HOUSE   OF  SAVOY 


Charles  Emmanuel  I., 

1580-1630. 

I 


Princes  of  Carignano. 


Victor  Amadeus  I., 

1630-1637. 

I 


Francis, 

1637-1638 ; 

ob.  s.  p. 


Charles  Emmanuel  II., 
1638-1675. 


Victor  Amadeus  II., 

1675-1730 
(King  of  Sardinia,  1720). 

Charles  Emmanuel  III., 
1730-1773. 

Victor  Amadeus  III., 

1773-1796. 

I 


Thomas  Francis. 


Emmanuel  Philibert, 
ob.  1709. 


Victor  Amadeus, 
ob.  1741. 


Charles 

Emmanuel  IV. 

1796-1802 ; 

ob.  s  p. 

1819. 


Victor 
Emmanuel  I. 

1802-1821 ; 

res.  1821 ; 
06.  1824,  s.p. 


Charles  Felix, 

1821-1831, 

Ob.  s.  p. 


Louis  Victor, 
ob.  1778. 

I 

Victor  Amadeus, 
ob.  1780. 


Charles  Emmanuel, 
ob.  1800. 


Charles  Albert, 
King,  1831-1849. 

Victor  Emmanuel  II. 

1849-1878 

(King  of  Italy, 

1861). 

Humbert  I., 
1878-1900. 

Victor  Emmanuel  III. 
1900- 


246 


HOUSE   OF  BEANDENBURG 


Frederick  I.,  first  King  of  Prussia,  1701, 
1688-1713. 


Willii 


Frederick  William  I., 

17131740. 

I 


Frederick  II.,  the  Great, 

1740-1786 ; 

ob.  s.  p. 


Frederick  William  IV., 

1840-1861 ; 

ob.  s.p. 


Augustus  Willie  m, 
ob.  1758. 


Frederick  William  II., 
1786  1797, 

Frederick  William  III., 
1797-1840. 

I 

I 


William  I., 

succ.  1861 ; 

11  German  Emperor," 

1871. 

Frederick, 
1888. 

William  II., 
1888- 


247 


APPENDIX  II 

SHOET  LIST  OF  BOOKS  ON  THE  PEEIOD 

1789-1878 

The  following  list  is  in  no  sense  exhaustive,  but  is  merely  intended 
for  those  who  wish  to  fill  in  the  sketch  presented  in  the  foregoing 
pages.  For  an  elaborate  bibliography  reference  may  be  made  to  Cam- 
bridge Modern  History,  vols.  viii.-x. 

A.  FOR  BEGINNERS. 

The  general  history  of  Europe  (1792-1880)  may  be  studied  in  C.  H. 
Fyffe's  History  of  Modern  Europe,  or  more  briefly  in  Lodge's  Modern 
Europe,  together  with  a  good  atlas,  e.g.,  Putzger's  or  Rothert's,  iv.  v.  b. 

Among  special  books  on  particular  chapters,  I  have  included  some 
historical  novels. 

Chaps.  II.-V.  :— 

Mallet :  French  Revolution. 

Mahan :  Influence  of  Sea  Power  upon  the  French  Revolution 

and  Empire.    (Vol.  I.,  chaps,  i.,  ii. ;  II.,  pp.  361-380,  and 

chaps,  xvi.,  xviii.,  xix.) 
Willert :  Mirabeau  ("  Foreign  Statesmen  "). 
Beesley:  Danton. 
Morley :  Robespierre. 
Arthur  Young :  Travels  in  France. 

Novels : — 

Dumas:  Ange  Pitou;  La  Comtesse  de  Charny,  and  Chevalier 

de  Maison  Rouge. 
Erckmann-Chatrian :    Histoire    d'un    paysan   and    Madame 

Thtrese. 

249 


250         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Victor  Hugo  :  L'an  '93. 
Stanley  Weyman :  Red  Cockade. 
Dickens :  Tale  of  Two  Cities. 

Chaps.  VI. -XL:— 

Rose  :  Life  of  Napoleon. 
Seeley:  Napoleon. 

Novels : — 

Gilbert  Parker :  Battle  of  the  Strong. 
Merriman  :  Barlasch  of  the  Guard. 
Balzac :  Les  Chcruans. 
Charles  Lever :  Charles  O'Maltey. 

Chaps.  XIL,  XIV.  :— 

Jervis  and  Hassall :  Student's  France. 

Chaps.  XIIL,  XV.  :  — 

Alison  Phillips  :  Greek  War  of  Independence. 

Holland  :  Treaty  Relations  between  Russia  and  Turkey. 

Novels : — 

Jokai :  Lion  of  Janina. 
E.  F.  Benson :  Vintage. 
Tolstoy :  Sevastopol. 

Chaps.  XVI. ,  XVII.  :— 

Countess  Cesaresco  :  Liberation  of  Italy. 
Marriott :  Makers  of  Modern  Italy. 
Bolton  King :  Mazzini. 

Novel  :— 
George  Meredith :  Vittoria. 

Chaps.  XVIII.-XX.  :— 

Malleson  :  Refounding  of  German  Empire. 

Headlam:  Bismarck. 

Bismarck  :  The  Man  and  the  Statesman  (trans.  A.  J.  Butler). 

Novel : — 
Zola:  LaDtbdcle. 


APPENDIX  II  251 

B.  FOR  MORE  ADVANCED  STUDENTS 

I.— General. 

Heeren  :  Political  System  of  Europe. 

Rose :  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic  Era. 

Morse  Stephens  :  Revolutionary  Europe  (1789-1815). 

Alison  Phillips  :  Modern  Europe,  (1815-1880). 

Lavisse  et  Rambaud  :  Histoire  Gendrale.    Vols.  viii.-xii. 

Seignobos  :  Histoire  Politique  de  VEur-/pe  Contemporaine. 

C.    M.    Andrews :     The   Historical    Development    of    Modern 

Europe  (from  1815). 
Kirkpatrick  (ed.) :  Lectures  on  the  History  of  the  Nineteenth 

Century. 
Rose  :  The  Development  of  the  European  Nations  (1870-1900). 

For  the  Geography  : — 

Poole :  Historical  Atlas  (Maps,  which  can  be  bought  separately, 

Nos.  11,  12,  13,  14,  42,  43.  59,  70,  82,  89). 
Himly  :  La  Formation,  Territorial. 

II.—  On  Particular  Chapters. 
Chaps.  II.-V.  :— 

De  Tocqueville  :  France  before  1789  (L'Ancien  Regime). 

Sorel :  U  Europe  et  la  Revolution  Frangaise. 

Morse  Stephens :  French  Revolution. 

Cherest :  La  Chute  de  I'Ancien  Regime. 

Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  viii. 

Carlyle's  French  Revolution  (edited  by  Rose  or  Fletcher). 

Chaps.  VI.-XII.  :— 

Rose :  Napoleonic  Studies. 
Fisher :  Napoleonic  Studies. 
Fournier :  Napoleon  I. 
Oman :  Peninsular  War. 
Sorel :  Le  Traite  de  Paris. 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  ix. 

Chap.  XII.,  XIV.  :— 

Dickinson :  Revolution  and  Reaction  in  Modern  France. 
Marriott :  George  Canning  and  his  Times. 


252         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 

Pierre  de  la  Gorce :  Histoire  du  Second  Empire. 
H.  A.  L.  Fisher :  Bonapartism. 
Hanotaux  :  La  France  Contemporaine. 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol.  x.  (The  Restoration). 

Chaps.  XIII.,  XV.  :— 
Rambaud:  Russia. 
Odysseus :  Turkey  in  Europe. 
Finlay :  History  of  the  Greek  Revolution. 
Driault :  La  Question  d' Orient. 
Kinglake :  Invasion  of  the  Crimea. 
Holland :  The  European  Concert  in  the  Eastern  Question. 

Chaps.  XVI.,  XVII.  :— 

Johnston :  Napoleonic  Empire  in  Southern  Italy. 

Bolton  King  :  History  of  Italian  Unity. 

Stillman :  Union  of  Italy. 

Trevelyan :  Garibaldi's  Defence  of  the  Roman  Republic. 

Chaps.  XVIII.,  XIX.  :— 

Sybel :  Die  Begrilnding  des  Deutschen  Reichs  (translated). 

Denys  :  La  Foundation  de  V Empire  Allemand. 

Fisher:  Studies  in  Napoleonic  Statesmanship  (Germany). 

Metternich :  Memoirs. 

Asseline :  Histoire  de  VAutriche  depuis  Marie  Thtrese. 

Auerbach :  Les  Races  et  Nationality's  en  Austriche-Hongrie. 

Busch :  Various  works  on  Bismarck. 

Chap.  XX.:— 

Sorel :  Histoire  Diplomatique  de  la  Guerre  Franco-Allemande. 
Chuquet :  Precis  de  la  Guerre  Franco-Allemande. 
Lord  Acton  :  Historical  Essays. 


INDEX 


ABO,  Treaty  of,  106,  120. 

Abercromby,  Sir  Kalph,  68. 

Aberdeen,  Lord,  167. 

Aboukir,  battle  of,  65. 

Acre,  siege  of,  65. 

Adrianople,  Treaty  of,  151. 

Africa,  236. 

Aix-la-Chapelle,  Congress  of,  133. 

Ajaccio,  57. 

Albuera,  battle  of,  99. 

Alexander  I.,  Czar,   68,   111,   119, 

121,  132,  149,  150. 
Alexander  II.,  Czar,  168,  169,  224. 
Alexander  Couza,  Prince,  169. 
Alexander    of    Battenberg,    Prince, 

171. 

Alexandria,  battle  of,  68. 
Algiers,  136. 
Alma,  battle  of,  167. 
Almeida,  99. 
Alsace,  46. 

Alsace-Lorraine,  43,  125,  126,  225. 
Amberg,  battle  of,  59. 
Amiens,  Treaty  of,  43,  68. 
Ancona,  177,  188. 
Andrassy,  Count,  170. 
Angouleme,  Due  d',  142. 
Anhalt,  213. 
Anselme,  General,  38. 
Arabi  Pasha,  237. 
Arcola,  battle  of,  60. 
Argyll,  8th  Duke  of,  176. 
Armed  Neutrality  League,  68. 
Artois,  Count  of  (see  Charles  X.), 

31,  73,  122. 

Aspern-Essling,  battle  of,  95. 
Aspromonte,  battle  of,  189. 
Assembly,  the  Constituent,  28. 
—  the  Legislative,  29. 
Association  of  Young  Italy,  178. 


Athens,  150. 

Auerstadt,  battle  of,  85. 

Augereau,  61. 

Austerlitz,  battle  of,  80,  83. 

Australia,  8,  235,  239. 

Austria,  34,  54,  62,  77,  80,  83,  94, 

95,  106,  127,  128,  177,  180, 181, 

182,  183,   184,  185,  186,   190, 

210,  213. 
Austrian    Netherlands,  5,    33,   37, 

214. 

BADAJOS,  99. 

Baden,  77,  128,  201,  214,  229. 

Bagration,  General,  110. 

Bailly,  49. 

Balkan  Peninsula,  6. 

Barclay  de  Tolly,  General,  110. 

Barras,  56,  61. 

Barrot,  Odilon,  155,  160. 

Basle,  Treaties  of,  52. 

Bastille,  the,  13,  21. 

Batavian  Republic   (see    Holland), 
54,  63,  68,  76. 

Bautzen,  battle  of,  113. 

Bavaria,  77,  201,  214,  223,  229. 

Baylen,  capitulation  of,  92. 

Bazaine,  Marshal,  224,  225. 

Beaconsfield,  Lord,  170,  172. 

Belgium,  7,  46. 

Benedetti,  Count,  222. 

Bentinck,  Lord  William,  174. 

Beresford,  Lord,  139. 

Berg,  Duchy  of,  98. 

Berlin,  201 ;  decree  of,  85  ;  memor- 
andum of  170. 
—  Treaty  of,  171. 

Bernadotte,  84,  105,  114,  117. 

Berri,  Due  de,  135. 

Beust,  Count,  214. 


253 


254 


THE  KEMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 


Bismarck,  190,  193,  207,  208,  210, 
211,  220,  221,  222,  223,  224, 
225,  228. 

Blanc,  Louis,  159,  161. 

Bloemfontein,  Convention  of,  236. 

Bliicher,  General,  114, 115,  116, 123. 

Boers,  the,  236. 

Bohemia,  202. 

Bologna,  177. 

Bonaparte,  Jerome,  82,  115,  184. 

—  Joseph,  81,  91,  100. 

—  Louis,  81,  98. 
Borodino,  battle  of,  110. 
Bosnia,  169. 
Boulogne,  78. 

Bourbons,  the,  71,  73,  91,  117,  122, 

123. 

Bourmont,  135. 
Boxer  Insurrection,  the,  240. 
Braganza,  House  of,  89. 
Brazil,  144. 
Bremen,  213. 
Brissot,  30,  46,  48. 
British  Empire,  8,  231,  239. 
Brumaire,  coup  d'ttat  of  18th,  65, 

71. 

Brunswick,  Duke  of,  35,  36,  95. 
Brunswick,  19,  201,  213. 
Bucharest,  peace  of,  6,  105,  146. 
Bulgaria,  171,  172. 
Bund,  the  Germanic,  128,  194,  197, 

208,  213. 
Burgos,  93. 
Burke,  42,  43,  71. 
Burrard,  Sir  Harry,  93. 
Busaco,  battle  of,  99. 
Byron,  Lord,  149. 

CADOUDAL,  GEORGES,  73. 
Calder,  Sir  Robert,  79. 
Camperdown,  battle  of,  63. 
Campo-Formio,   Treaty  of,  60,  62, 

64. 

Canada,  234,  238. 
Canning,  George,  88,  92,  132,  142, 

149,  151. 
Canrobert,  168. 
Cape  Colony,  8,  63,  130,  236. 
Cape  Finisterre,  battle  of,  79. 
Cape  St.  Vincent,  battle  of,  63. 
Capodistrias,  151. 


Carbonari,  the,  176,  177,  178. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  27,  48. 

Carnot,  46,  56,  61. 

Castel  Fidardo,  battle  of,  188. 

Castlereagh,  119, 132,  141,  142,  148. 

Caulaincourt,  116. 

Cavour,  182,  184,  185, 186,  187,  188, 

189,  191. 
Ceylon,  8,  130. 

Chambord,  Comte  de,  127,  137,  155. 
Champ  de  Mars,  28. 
Charleroi,  123. 
Charles  Albert  of  Sardinia,  178, 179, 

180,  181. 

Charles  Felix,  176. 
Charles,  Archduke,  94,  95. 
Charles  IV.  of  Spain,  90,  91. 
Charles  X.  of  France  (see  Artois), 

133,  135. 

Chatillon,  Congress  of,  116. 
Chaumette,  49. 

Chaumont,  Treaty  of,  116,  123. 
Chauvelin,  44. 
China,  239. 
Church  property,  25. 
Church,  General,  150. 
Cintra,  Convention  of,  93. 
Cisalpine  Republic,  60. 
Cispadane  Republic,  60. 
Ciudad  Rodrigo,  99. 
Clootz,  Anarcharsis,  50. 
Clotilde,  Princess,  184. 
Coalition,  First,  54. 

—  Second,  66. 

—  Third,  77. 
Coblentz,  35. 
Cochrane,  Lord,  150. 
Code  Napoleon,  75. 
Collingwood,  Admiral,  78. 
Committee  of  Public  Safety,  46. 
Commune,  the,  36,  226. 
Concordat  of  1801,  75. 
Condorcet,  30. 

Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  81,  103. 

—  North  German,  213. 
Constantinople,  145,  151,  156,  171, 

237. 

—  Conference  of,  170. 
Constitution  of  the  Year  VIII.,  71, 

74. 
Continental  System,  the,  85, 98, 104. 


INDEX 


255 


Convention,  National,  38. 
Copenhagen,  88. 

—  battle  of,  68. 
Cornwallis,  Admiral,  78. 
Corsica,  57. 
Council  of  Ancients,  55. 

Cinq-Cent,  55. 

Couthon,  50. 

Cuba,  240. 

Custine,  37. 

Custozza,  battle  of,  181. 

Crete,  169. 

Crimean  War,  166,  183,  216. 

Cyprus,  171,  232. 

DANTON,  28,  36,  37,  50. 

Danzic,  115. 

Darmstadt,  201. 

De"ak,  Francis,  215. 

Decazes,  135. 

Decree  of  December  15th,  1792,  40. 

Denmark,  210. 

Desmoulins,  Camille,  29,  49,  50. 

Diebitsch,  General,  151. 

Directory,  the,  55. 

Dresden,  113,  114,  115. 

Droit  au  Travail,  158. 

Ducos,  70. 

Dumouriez,  34,  36,  46. 

Dunkirk,  46. 

Dupont,  92. 

Durham,  Lord,  238. 

EASTERN  Question,  145,  165,  169. 
Egypt,  63,   64,  68,   150,   166,  237, 

238. 

Emancipation,  edict  of,  107. 
Emigres,  the,  33,  48,  55. 
Empire,  the  Second,  162. 
Enghien,  Due  d',  73. 
England,  34,  40,  54,  63,  76,  77,  85, 

86,  166,  168,  237. 
Erfurt,  Treaty  of,  103. 
Erzeroum,  151. 
Eugenie,  Empress,   164,    219,  223, 

224. 
Eylau,  battle  of,  87. 

FAVKE,  JULES,  225. 
Ferdinand  of  Austria,  95,  202. 


Ferdinand  L  of  Naples,   129,  139, 

140,  174. 
Ferdinand  II.  (Bomba)  of  the  Two 

Sicilies,  180,  182,  187. 
Ferdinand  VII.  of  Spain,  117,  134, 

137. 
Ferdinand,  Prince  of  the  Asturias, 

91. 

Feuillants,  the,  29. 
Fichte,  94. 

Finland,  5,  88, 103,  127,  130. 
Fleurus,  54. 

Fontainebleau,  Decree  of,  86. 
—  Treaty  of,  91,  116. 
Fouche",  73,  134. 
Fourier,  159. 

Fox,  Charles  James,  39,  41,  83. 
France,  2,  7,  10,  43,  44, 53,  223,  224, 

228,  231,  237,  239. 
Francis  II.  of  Austria,  81,  116. 
Francis  II.   (Bombino)  of  the  Two 

Sicilies,  187. 
Francis  Joseph  of  Austria,  190,  203, 

205,  208,  215,  223. 
Franco-Prussian  War,  the,  190,  220, 

228. 

Frankfort-on-Main,  5,  128. 
Frankfort  Parliament,  the,  204. 
—  peace  of,  226. 
Frederick  of  Augustenburg,210. 
Frederick  VII.  of  Denmark,  210. 
Frederick  Charles  of  Prussia,  224. 
Frederick  William  II.  of  Prussia,  33. 
Frederick  William  III.  of  Prussia, 

77,  84,  95,  107,  109,  112,  113, 

200,  201,  204,  205,  207,  208. 
Frossard,  General,  224. 
Fructidor,  coup  d'dtat  of,  61. 
Fuentes  d'Onoro,  battle  of,  99. 

GAMBETTA,  LEON,  225. 
Gantheaume,  78. 

Garibaldi,  181,  187,  188,  189,  190. 
Gamier-Pages,  160. 
Gastein,  Convention  of,  211. 
Gaudet,  30. 
Genoa,  7,  58. 
Gensonne",  30. 

George,  King  of  Greece,  152. 
Germany,  4,  81,  128,  193,  194,  196, 
198,  201,  205,  224,  225,  239. 


256         THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 


German  Empire,  the,  229,  231. 
German  Liberation,  war  of,  112, 114, 

129. 

Ghent,  peace  of,  130. 
Gioberti,  Vincenzo,  179,  182. 
Girondists,  the,  29,  30,  32. 
Gneisenau,  108. 
Godoy,  90,  91. 
Gramont,  Due  de,  223. 
Gravelotte,  battle  of,  224. 
Great  Britain,  2,  130,  232,  238,  239. 
Greece,  151,  169,  232. 
Greek  Kevolt,  the,  148. 
Gregory  XVI.,  Pope,  174,  179. 
Grouchy,  General,  124. 
Guadet,  30. 
Guiana,  77. 

Guizot,  155,  157,  159,  160. 
Gustavus  IV.,  King  of  Sweden,  77. 

HABSBURGS,  the,  194,  202,  204. 

Hamburg,  213. 

Hanover,  5, 77,  84, 128, 197, 201, 212. 

Hanse  Towns,  the,  98. 

Hardenberg,  94,  107,  125,  197. 

Haugwitz,  77,  84. 

Hubert,  49. 

Heligoland,  232. 

Herzegovina,  169. 

Hesse,  5,  229. 

Hesse-Cassel,  197,  201,  212. 

Hoche,  55,  63. 

Hohenlinden,  battle  of,  67. 

Hohenzollern,  the,   194,    213,  220, 

222,  229. 
Holland,  7,  98. 

-  King  of,  221. 
Holy  Alliance,  the,  132,  174. 
Hondschoote,  battle  of,  46. 
Hood,  Admiral,  46. 
Hostages,  Law  of,  74. 
Howe,  Admiral,  53,  54. 
Hudson,  Sir  James,  185. 
Huguenots,  the,  14. 
Humboldt,  94,  108,  119. 
Hundred  Days,  the,  126. 
Hungary,  127,  202,  203. 
Hypsilanti,  Prince  Alexander,  149. 

IBRAHIM  PASHA,  150. 
Imperial,  the  Prince,  227. 


India,  130,  234. 
Inkermann,  battle  of,  167. 
Ireland,  63. 

Isabella,  Queen  of  Spain,  158. 
Italian  War  of  Independence,  216. 
—  Bepublic,  76. 

Italy,  6,  57,  58,  127,  129,  139,  174, 
178,  183,  190,  191,  202,  231. 

JACOBINISM,  42. 

Jacobins,  the,  27,  29,  47,  49,  52. 

Jaffa,  65. 

Jassy,  Treaty  of,  6. 

Jemappes,  battle  of,  37. 

Jena,  battle  of,  85. 

John,  Archduke,  95. 

John,  Prince  of  Saxony,  151. 

John  VI.  of  Portugal,  139,  144. 

Josephine,  Empress,  57,  98. 

Jourdan,  53,  58. 

Juarez,  Benito,  219. 

Junot,  89. 

Juntas,  the,  100. 

KAINARDJI,  Treaty  of,  6,  146,  151 . 
Kalisch,  Treaty  of,  112,  120,  127. 
Kapolna,  battle  of,  203. 
Karlsbad  Decrees,  197. 
Kars,  151,  168. 
Kossuth,  202,  203. 
Kotzebue,  196. 

LABOURDONNAIE,  Count,  135. 

Lafayette,  28,  29,  35. 

Laibach,  Congress  of,  133,  141. 

Lamartine,  155, 160,  161. 

La  Marmora,  General,  167. 

Langensalza,  battle  of,  212. 

Laon,  battle  of,  116. 

La  Bothiere,  battle  of,  116. 

Lauenberg,  Duchy  of,  5. 

Ledru-Bollin,  160. 

Legion  of  Honour,  76. 

Leipzic,  battle  of,  114. 

Leopold,  Emperor,  33,  34. 

Leopold  of  Hohenzollern  Sigmarin- 

gen,  222. 
Leopold  of  Saxe-Coburg    (King  of 

the  Belgians),  151,  154. 
Leopold  of  Tuscany,  180. 
Lewis  of  Bavaria,  201. 


INDEX 


257 


Liancourt,  Due  de,  13. 

Ligny,  battle  of,  123,  124. 

Ligurian  Republic,  the,  60,  76. 

Lisbon,  89. 

Lombardy,  6,  58,  181,  186. 

London,  Treaties  of,  156,  157,  210, 

221. 

Longwy,  36. 

Louisa,  Queen  of  Prussia,  85. 
Louis  XIV.,  14. 
Louis  XV.,  14. 
Louis  XVI.,  10,  24,  27,  34,  35,  37, 

38,  40,  133. 
Louis  XVII.,  55. 
Louis  XVIIL,  117,  122,  125,  133, 

135. 
Louis  Philippe  (see  Due  d'Orleans), 

136,  155,  157,  158,  160. 
Louisiana,  68. 
Liibeck,  213. 
Luneville,  peace  of,  67. 
Luxemburg,  Duchy  of,  221. 

MAASSEN,  199. 

Mack,  General,  80. 

MacMahon,  Marshal,  224,  227. 

Madrid,  100. 

Magenta,  battle  of,  186,  218. 

Magnano,  battle  of,  66. 

Malakoff,  the,  168. 

Malta,  64,  76. 

Mandat,  36. 

Manin,  Daniel,  180. 

Mantua,  siege  of,  60,  186. 

Marengo,  battle  of,  67. 

Marie  Antoinette,    Queen,    34,   35, 

48. 
Marie   Louise,  Empress,    98,   104, 

129,  177.  ^fc, 

Marmont,  Marshal,  99,  136. 
Maro-Jaroslavitz,  battle  of,  111. 
Martignac,  135. 
Martinique,  78. 
Ma,<3se"na,  99. 

Maximilian,  Archduke,  219. 
Maximilian  II.  of  Bavaria,  201. 
Mazzini,   174,  177,   178,  179,   181, 

187. 

Mecklenburg-Schwerin,  213. 
Mecklenburg- Strelitz,  213. 
Mediterranean,  the,  237. 

17 


Mehemet-  Ali,  150,  156. 

Mentana,  battle  of,  190. 

Metternich,  105,  113,  119,  128,  132, 
140,  174,  176,  177,  180,  196, 
197,  198,  200,  202,  204. 

Metz,  siege  of,  224,  225. 

Mexico,  218,  219,  220. 

Miguel  of  Portugal,  Dom,  139,  143. 

Milan,  59,  180,  186. 

—  decree  of,  86. 
Mirabeau,  12,  23,  26,  27,  84. 
Miramon,  219. 
Missiessy,  78. 
Missolonghi,  150. 
Modena,  181,  186. 

Modena,  Duke  Francis  of,  177. 

Moldavia,  88,  103,  169. 

Mole,  Count,  160. 

Mollien,  109. 

Moltke,  207,  223. 

Monroe  Doctrine,  the,  143. 

Montenegro,  169,  170. 

Montesquieu,  26. 

Montesquieu,  General,  37. 

Montpensier,  Due  de,  158. 

Moore,  Sir  John,  93. 

Moreau,  58,  73. 

Moscow,  110. 

Mount  Tabor,  65. 

Mimchengratz,  Conference  of,  198. 

Murat,  Joachim,  91,  125. 

Mysore  War,  234. 

NAPLES,  6,  77,  174,  180,  188. 

Napoleon  I,,  Bonaparte,  2,  18,  44, 
56,  57,  60,  61,  64,  69,  70,  72, 
73,  76,  81,  85,  86,  91,  92,  93, 
95,  96,  98,  105,  109,  110,  113, 
114,  116,  121,  122,  123,  173, 
196,  237. 

Napoleon  III.,  161,  162,  163,  165, 
181,  183,  185,  186,  211,  214, 
216,  217,  220,  221,  223,  224, 
227. 

Nassau,  5,  201. 

National  Assembly,  the,  12,  21,  24, 
42. 

—  workshops,  the,  161. 
Navarino,  battle  of,  150. 
Necker,  13,  17,  25. 
Neerwinden,  battle  of,  46. 


258 


THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 


Nelson,  64,  68,  78. 
Nemours,  Due  de,  154. 
Neo-Guelphs,  the,  179,  182. 
Nesselrode,  Count,  119. 
Netherlands,  the  Belgian,  127,  130, 

153,  154. 

—  the  Spanish,  5,  7. 
New  Zealand,  8. 
Ney,  Marshal,  123,  134. 
Nice,  38,  184,  187,  218. 
Nicholas  I,  Czar,   150,   166,   168, 

203,  237. 

Nightingale,  Florence,  167. 
Nile,  battle  of,  64. 
Norway,  130,  232. 
Novara,  battle  of,  176,  181,  182 

OLDENBURG,  98,  104,  213. 

Orders  in  Council,  86. 

Orebro,  Treaty  of,  106. 

Orleans,  Due  d'  (see  Louis  Philippe), 

136. 

Orsini,  184. 
Otto  of  Bavaria,  151,  152. 


PALAFOX,  92. 

Palermo,  180,  187. 

Palestine,  165. 

Palm,  85. 

Palmerston,  154,  156,  157,  167,  184. 

Pampeluna,  100. 

Papal  infallibility,  192,  231. 

—  States,  the,  98. 
Paris,  Comte  de,  160. 
Paris,  Peace  of,  168. 

—  First  Treaty  of,  117. 

—  20,  21,  46,  61,  65,  121,  124,  225, 
226,  227. 

Parma,  181,  186. 

Paul,  Czar,  68. 

Pedro  of  Portugal,  Dom,  139. 

Pekin,  240. 

Pellisser,  Marshal,  168. 

Peninsula,  the,  99. 

Peninsular  War,  44. 

Pentarchy,  the,  154,  157. 

Philippe  Egalite-,  49. 

Philippines,  the,  240. 

Pichegru,  61,  73. 

Piedmont,  6,  58,  76,  180, 182. 


Pilnitz,  declaration  of,  34. 

Pitt,  William,  42,  43,  44,  64,  65,  77, 

82,  146. 

Pius  VII.,  Pope,  98,  117. 
Pius  IX.,  Pope,  163,  179,  180,  181, 

188. 

Plevna,  siege  of,  170. 
Plombieres,  184. 
Poland,  5,  54,  121. 
Polignac,  Count  Paul  de,  135,  136. 
Port  Arthur,  239. 
Portugal,  88,  89,  93,  139,  143. 
Prague,  Treaty  of,  212. 
Prairial,  law  of  22nd,  50,  52. 
Pressburg,  Treaty  of,  80. 
Provence,  Count  of,  31. 
Prussia,  4,  35,  54,  77,  80,  83,  84,  85, 

106,  107,   127,  128,   190,   194, 

198, 199,  208,  211, 212, 213,  214, 

222. 

Prussian  Crown  Prince,  224. 
Pyramids,  battle  of,  64. 

QUATRE  BRAS,  battle  of,  123. 
Quadruple  Treaty,  132. 
Quiberon  Bay,  battle  of,  55. 

BADETSKY,  181. 
Baglan,  Lord,  167,  168. 
Banke,  15. 

Beason,  the  Feast  of,  49. 
Beichenbach,  Treaty  of,  113,  120. 
Beichstag,  the,  213, 
Bepublic,  the  Third,  227. 
Bevolution,  French,  13,  240. 

—  of  1830,  177. 

—  of  1848,  160,  161. 
Bichelieu,  Due  de,  14,  134. 
Bied,  Treaty  of,  120. 
Bivoli,  battle  of,  60. 
Bobespierre,  28, 34,  39,  47,  50,  5L 
Boland,  Madame,  30,  48. 
Bomagna,  the,  168,  218. 

Borne,  64,  181,  190,  191. 

—  King  of,  98,  124. 

Boon,  General,  206,  207,  211,  223. 
Bossi,  Count,  181. 
Boumania,  169,  172. 
Bousseau,  18,  19. 

Bussia,  5,  77,  87,  105,  127,  130, 131, 
146,  169,  170,  229,  239. 


INDEX 


259 


SADOWA  (Koniggratz),  battle  of,  212. 

St.  Arnaud,  167. 

St.  Cloud,  ordinances  of,  136. 

St.  Helena,  125. 

St.  Just,  50. 

St.  Lucia,  77,  130. 

St.  Simon,  159. 

Salamanca,  battle  of,  100. 

Sambre,  the,  123. 

Sand  Eiver  Convention,  the,  236. 

San  Martino,  186. 

San  Sebastian,  100. 

San  Stephano,  Treaty  of,  171. 

Santerre,  29. 

Saragossa,  92. 

Sardinia,  6,  54,  173,  186. 

Savoy,  37,  184,  187,  218. 

Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  213. 

Saxe-Weimar,  213. 

Saxony,  85,  95,  121,  197,  201,  212, 

213. 

Scandinavia,  7. 
Scharnhorst,  94,  108. 
Scheldt,  the,  40,  41,  96. 
Schiller,  94. 

Schleswig-Holstein,  5,  210. 
Schonbriinn,  Treaty  of,  80,  84. 
Schwarzenberg,  203,  205,  206,  214, 

215. 

Sebastopol,  battle  of,  167. 
Se"dan,  battle  of,  224,  225. 
Servia,  169,  170. 
Seymour,  Sir  Hamilton,  166. 
Sicilies,  the  Two,  218. 
Sicily,  6. 

Sierra  Morena,  the,  99. 
Sieves,  Abbe",  29,  70,  72. 
Sinope,  battle  of,  167. 
Smith,  Adam,  17, 18. 
Smolensko,  110. 
Solferino,  battle  of,  186,  218. 
Sonderbund,  the,  157,  159. 
Soult,  Marshal,  99,  100. 
Spain,  54,  63,  90,  92,  240. 
Spanish  Colonies,  the,  142, 143. 
—  marriages,  the,  158. 
Stadion,  Count,  94. 
States-General,  the,  10,  11,  19. 
States,  United,  the,  130,  240. 
Stein,  94,  107,  109,  112,  113,  128. 
Steinmetz,  224. 


Stewart,  Lord,  140. 

Stockach,  battle  of,  66. 

Strasburg,  225. 

Stratford  de  Redcliffe,  Lord,  167. 

Sudan,  the,  238. 

Suez  Canal,  the,  237. 

Sultan  of  Turkey,  103,  105. 

Suspects,  law  of,  48. 

Sweden,  88,  103,  106,  130,  232. 

Switzerland,  64,  76,  129,  157. 

TALAVEEA,  battle  of,  93,  96,  99. 
Talleyrand,  116,  119,  134. 
Tauroggen,  Convention  of,  112. 
Tchernaia,  battle  of,  183. 
Terror,  the,  48,  49. 
Thiers,  136,  155,  157,  160,  225  227. 
Tilsit,  Treaty  of,  87,  89,  103,  127, 

146. 

Tobago,  77,  130. 
Tocqueville,  Alexis  de,  14. 
Todleben,  General,  167. 
Tolentino,  peace  of,  59. 
Toplitz,  Treaty  of,  120. 
Torres  Vedras,  lines  of,  99. 
Toulon,  46,  47. 
Trafalgar,  battle  of,  79,  86. 
Transpadane  Republic,  60. 
Trinidad,  130. 
Trochu,  General,  225. 
Troppau,  Congress  of,  133,  146. 
Tunis,  239. 
Turgot,  17,  18. 
Turin,  187,  188. 
Turkey,  65,  150,  232. 
Turks,  the  Ottoman,  145,  171,  237. 
Tuscany,  Grand  Duke  of,  54,  81. 
Tuscany,  6,  58,  180,  186. 

ULM,  capitulation  of,  80. 
United  Provinces,  the,  33. 
Unkiar  Skelessi,  Treaty  of,  156. 

VARENNES,  28. 

Valmy,  cannonade  of,  37. 

Vended,  la,  46,  49. 

Vende'miaire,  coup  d'ttat  of  13th, 

56. 

Venetia,  186,  190,  211. 
Venice,  7,  58,  70. 
Verdun,  35. 


260          THE  REMAKING  OF  MODERN  EUROPE 


Vergniaud,  30,  35,  46,  48. 

Verona,  133,  141. 

Versailles,  24,  229. 

Victoria,  Queen,  158. 

Victor  Emmanuel  I.,  117,  129,  176. 

Victor  Emmanuel  II.,  181,  182,  184, 

185,  186,  189,  190,  191. 
Vienna,  180,  202,  203,  212. 

—  Congress  of,  119,  131. 

—  Treaty  of,  96,  210. 
Vieux  Cordelier,  le,  49. 
Villafranca,  truce  of,  186. 
Villele,  135,  141. 
Villeneuve,  Admiral,  78. 
Vimiero,  battle  of,  92. 
Vittoria,  battle  of,  100. 
Voltaire,  15,  19. 

WAGBAM,  battle  of,  96. 
Walcheren,  96. 
Wallachia,  88,  103,  169. 
Warsaw,  decree  of,  86. 
Waterloo,  battle  of,  1,  124. 
Wattignies,  battle  of,  46. 


Wavre,  124. 

Weimar,  201. 

Wellesley,  Lord,  234. 

Wellesley,  Sir  Arthur  (see  Welling- 
ton), 92,  93. 

Wellington,  Duke  of,  114,  119,  122, 
126,  142,  151,  152. 

Weissenburg,  battle  of,  224. 

William  I.  of  Prussia,  207,  229. 

William  of  Orange,  115. 

Windischgratz,  Prince,  202. 

Worth,  battle  of,  224. 

Wurmser,  60. 

Wiirtemberg,  77,  128,  201,  214,  229. 

Wiirzburg,  59. 

YORCK,  General,  112,  113. 
York,  Duke  of,  46. 
Young,  Arthur,  17,  22. 

ZNAIM,  armistice  of,  96. 
Zollverein,  the,  199,  204,  205,  214. 
Zurich,  Tieaty  of,  186. 


THE    ABERDEEN    UNIVERSITY    PRESS    LIMITED 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL 


LD  21-loOm-7,'33 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


